Subject: [dhcwg] Assigning Option Codes

From: "Cosmo, Patrick" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 08:21:52 -0800

The IANA appears to have a list of options numbers that are assigned to
options that are still in the IETF draft process, or in some cases, appear
merely to have been "requested" (I don't even see an IETF draft for some of
these), see http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-extensions/. 

Are these numbers actually assigned to options that have not become RFCs? Or
are they in some sort of "in-between" state where they are being set aside
for an option for the day when it does become an RFC? Or is it merely a list
of requests for numbers, but does not reflect actual assignment in any way?

Any comments/insight?

Patrick

---

From: Ralph Droms <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 11:26:52 -0500

Patrick,

Those option codes that do not have an associated RFC (or RFC-to-be) were 
assigned before RFC2939 changed the way in which option codes are assigned.

The dhc WG is working to recover those never-used option codes so they can 
be returned to the pool of available codes.

- Ralph

At 08:21 AM 2/11/2003 -0800, Cosmo, Patrick wrote:

>merely to have been "requested" (I don't even see an IETF draft for some 
>of these), see 
><http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-extensions/>http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-extensions/. 
>
>
>Are these numbers actually assigned to options that have not become RFCs? 
>Or are they in some sort of "in-between" state where they are being set 
>aside for an option for the day when it does become an RFC? Or is it 
>merely a list of requests for numbers, but does not reflect actual 
>assignment in any way?
>
>Any comments/insight?
>
>Patrick

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