Subject: Re: The Name Service Search Option for DHCP to WG last call

From: Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 09:05:44 -0500

Mail sent to [email-masked] by [email-masked]:

  >Carl Smith has submitted a revised version of "The Name Service Search
  >Option for DHCP" (draft-ietf-dhc-nsso-02.txt).  As agreed at the most
  >recent DHC WG meeting, this draft is ready for WG last call, prior to
  >submission for acceptance as a "Proposed Standard".  If you have any final
  >comments about this draft prior to submission, please respond to
  >[email-masked] before Wedenesday, 1/19/00.

The draft says:

  >   A name service option code of 0 is used to indicate that the client
  >   should refer to local configuration information.

How is this different from merely omitting the Name Service Search Option
from the DHCP OFFERs and ACKs? Surely, if there is no Name Service Search
Option, then any client will refer to local configuration information
anyway, as it does today.

If an option code of 0 has identical effect to having no option at all, I
propose that sentence be removed.

Having two alternative ways of doing the same thing just makes testing
more laborious and bugs more likely.

Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
   * <A HREF="http://ResComp.Stanford.EDU/~cheshire/">Web Page</A>
   * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 18:11:32 -0500

> anyway, as it does today.

You may want to say "local, BIND, yp" or "bind, local, YP".   0 means
local in this context.

			       _MelloN_