Re: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-timezone-option-02.txt

[John Schnizlein <jschnizl at cisco.com>]

Changing the size of the length field is not compatible with the 
definition in RFC 3121. Notice in this quoted excerpt that the length 
field is explicitly specified as "length octet".

John

2. BOOTP Extension/DHCP Option Field Format

   DHCP options have the same format as the BOOTP 'vendor extensions'
   defined in RFC 1497 [2].  Options may be fixed length or variable
   length.  All options begin with a tag octet, which uniquely
   identifies the option.  Fixed-length options without data consist of
   only a tag octet.  Only options 0 and 255 are fixed length.  All
   other options are variable-length with a length octet following the
   tag octet.

On Aug 10, 2006, at 2:19 PM, Mark Stapp wrote:
> > > and further on in section 2:
> > >
> > >   "Len is the two-octet value of the length ..."
> > >
> > > is that correct? these are 16-bit length v4 options? the accompanying
> > > picture looks like regular 8-bit lengths are intended.
> > The intent is 16 bits.  How can I improve the diagram?
>
> ummm - really? is there any other dhcpv4 option that specifies this? I 
> think that these v4 options should not try to specify unique 'type' or 
> 'len' encodings. that'd be undesirable...
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg