Subject: RE: [dhcwg] TTL on service addresses

From: "Bernie Volz (EUD)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 22:02:30 -0600

Ralph:

I assume this is for DHCPv6 (Information-Request)? Or? Would this TTL apply to Request as well? 

I would go with one TTL for all parameters (as Ted suggestions).

- Bernie

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:12 PM
To: Ralph Droms
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] TTL on service addresses

Why not just have the server set the renewal time on the packet to the 
shortest TTL in the packet?   Why does the client even need to know 
this, since what it's going to have to do to refresh the information is 
to renew the lease anyway.   And if we do it this way, does it need to 
be a protocol issue?

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg