Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:25:51 -0800 From: Akihiro Tominaga <tomy@gunpowder.Stanford.EDU> To: brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (wide) DHCP negotiation using the REQUEST_IPADDR option Message-ID: <199701180125.RAA11735@dynamite.Stanford.EDU> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:42:29 %2B0000" References: <199701180042.AAA02128@awfulhak.demon.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
From: Brian Somers <brian@awfulhak.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: (wide) DHCP negotiation using the REQUEST_IPADDR option Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:42:29 +0000 > Right, so we're agreed ? Currently, the code returns -1 (remains silent) if > it has a cid & a *different* IP that the one suggested by the client. My > patch says it should NAK it. No, I'm not. I think, you didn't understand what I meant. Client requests address 'A'. There is a server 'X' which has the binding that points address 'B'. 'B' is already expired. There is another server 'Y' which has the binding that points address 'A'. 'A' is valid. This is not illegal situation, and if 'X' sends NAK and 'Y' sends ACK, there is no gurantee which packet arrives first. So the behavior of the client changes depending on arrivals of packets. IMHO, the server should send back NAK only if the DHCPREQUEST is sent to the server with Unicast IP address. I guess, the word 'the server has no **record**' has vagueness. I think it should be changed like the following sentence: the server has non-expired lease I ask about it at the DHCPv4 ML. -- Visiting Researcher of Stanford Univ. Mosquito Net Project. Keio Univ. WIDE Project. Akihiro Tominaga (tomy@mosquitonet.stanford.edu)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199701180125.RAA11735>