Subject: DHCP AutoConfig Option Size

From: "Ryan Troll" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 02:28:48 -0400 (EDT)

All,

I posted here last week asking about a possible change to the size of the
DHCP AutoConfigure option, to allow for future use of more bits for
enabling/disabling different items in the future.  If there's a general
consensus on this, I'd like to get this change made sooner rather than
later, so that this draft can be moved forward faster.  However, so far I've
only heard one response, and I'd like to get more input.

Please let me know if you have an opinion about this idea.

Thanks,
-Ryan

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 13:55:38 -0400 (EDT)

> enabling/disabling different items in the future.

The one response you got was that you shouldn't do it, and I tend to
agree - we've made a policy decision not to overload options, and what
you're proposing is essentially that.

			       _MelloN_

---

From: "Ryan Troll" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 16:50:10 -0400 (EDT)

Ah.  I was unaware of the previous policy decision to not overload options.
That makes this choice easy.

Thanks,
-Ryan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Ted
> Lemon
> Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 1998 2:05 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: DHCP AutoConfig Option Size
>
>
>

---

From: Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1998 07:35:56 -0400 (EDT)

>you're proposing is essentially that.

I'll second that response - we've discovered we're not as short of option
codes as we thought, so we have enough (I hesitate to say "plenty") to use
until the new options encoding is developed.

- Ralph