Subject: [dhcwg] comments on draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-01

From: Carsten Strotmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 16:12:53 +0100

Hi,

I've read "draft-ietf-dhc-topo-conf-01". 

Below are some (minor) comments:

 -----

 Page 3

> 2.  Terminology
>
>   an IP address with a scope of use wider than the local link.

 the term to be defined here seems to be missing

 -----

 Page 7 - 4.  Simple Subnetted Network

>  Relays A, B, C and D in this
>   example are represented in the diagram as IP routers with an embedded
>   relay function, because this is a very typical configuration, but the
>   relay function can also be provided in a separate server on each
>   link.
  
 maybe replace "separate server" in this sentence with "separate host",
 as a relay is not necessary a "server" (could be just any node in the
 local link).

 -----

 Page 6

> In DHCPv6 that is also possible in case where server is
>   configured with server unicast option and clients are able to take
>   advantage of it.

 In DHCPv6 that is also possible in case where *the* server is
    configured with *a* server unicast option and clients are able to take
    advantage of it.

 -----

 Page 8, Figure 3

 there is a stray "Figure 2" text in Figure 3

 -----

 Page 8

> ... every commercial  DHCP server provides similar functionality.

 and 

 Page 11 

> ... accomplished with all existing commercial DHCP servers.

 and

 Page 11 - 8.  Dynamic Lookup

> However, all modern commercial DHCP servers ...

 Might be just a matter of taste, but "all/every" and "commercial" seem
 to be overly specific. "modern DHCP server(s)" might be more general for
 the document.

 ----- 

 Page 10

 the configuration example is labeled "Figure 3", but there already is a
 Figure 3 on Page 8. This is probably "Figure 4".

 -----

 Page 11 - 8.  Dynamic Lookup

 The text does not mention TTL and how long the data that has been looked
 up can be used.

 The text should have some information about data that is cached should
 have some kind of TTL (either delivered as part of the lookup protocol,
 or a default, or configurable).

 -----

> Page 12 - 10.  Mutliple subnets on the same link

 Mutliple --> Multiple

 10.  Multiple subnets on the same link

 ----- 

 Page 12 - 10.  Multiple subnets on the same link

> Such a configuration is often referred to as shared
>   subnets.

 Using different terminology is often a source of confusion, esp. if
 network admins coming from a Microsoft Windows background talk to admins
 with Unix background.

 What is called "shared subnets" in popular Unix DHCP servers is called a
 "multinet" in the Microsoft documentation. The administrative
 configuration inside a Microsoft DHCP server to work with such a
 "multinet" is called a "DHCP Superscope":
 <http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd759168.aspx>

 To bridge the language gap between both camps reading this BCP, it might be
 useful to define both terms in section "2.  Terminology".

 ----

-- 
Carsten Strotmann
Email: [email-masked]
Blog: strotmann.de

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 16:21:31 +0000

> as a relay is not necessary a "server" (could be just any node in the

Probably you mean "node," not "host," but otherwise I think this is a good suggestion.

> to be overly specific. "modern DHCP server(s)" might be more general for

The text actually also turns out not to be true, so it might be better to say "some" rather than "all" in any case.

> useful to define both terms in section "2.  Terminology".

Definitely.