Subject: [dhcwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-09.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:35:33 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Dynamic Host Configuration Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options
	Author(s)       : David W. Hankins
                          Tomasz Mrugalski
                          Marcin Siodelski
                          Sheng Jiang
                          Suresh Krishnan
	Filename        : draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-09.txt
	Pages           : 22
	Date            : 2012-12-20

Abstract:
   This document provides guidance to prospective DHCPv6 Option
   developers to help them creating option formats that are easily
   adoptable by existing DHCPv6 software.  This document updates
   RFC3315.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-09

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-09

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Marcin Siodelski <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 10:33:07 +0100

Hi All,

The new version of "draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-09" has been uploaded.
The key changes in this version are:

1. Switched from "Informational" status to "Standards Track" status and
updating RFC3315.
2. Described the format of an option that conveys IPv6 address prefix
3. Described the format of an option that conveys boolean value (an option
with a length 0)
4. Added a section on choosing between FQDN and address when defining an
option
5. Added "Transition Technologies" section that gives the guideline, that
options specific to a transition from IPv4 to IPv6, should be carried as
DHCPv4 options so as they get deprecated along with DHCPv4.
6. Updated Acknowledgments and References

There is an ongoing discussion about possible ways to solve the problem
whether both FQDN and address can be carried in a single option and how
they should be encoded (boucadair-dhc-address-name-encoding thread). Since
there appear to be no consensus on this yet, the outcome from this
discussion (in particular, order of choices preference:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/current/msg13547.html) has not
been included in the latest version of "Option Guidelines" document.

Cheers,
Marcin

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 8:35 PM, <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>