<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<reference anchor="I-D.ietf-dhc-client-options" target="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dhc-client-options-00">
   <front>
      <title>Interpreting Client Options for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
</title>
      <author initials="R. B." surname="Hibbs" fullname="Richard Barr Hibbs">
         <organization>Pacific*Bell</organization>
      </author>
      <date month="October" day="19" year="1999" />
      <abstract>
	 <t>During the summer of 1999, a grand debate raged over the correct
interpretation of several DHCP client options as described in [RFC
2132], as well as the need for one option whose proposing
Internet-Draft expired.
As a result of that debate, the authors gained some insights into
the intended (or unintended!) interpretation of certain options
defined in [RFC 2132,] particularly the Vendor Class Identifier
(option 60) and Vendor Encapsulated Options (option 43.)
These insights are presented in this informational Internet-Draft,
whose reason for being is to act as an aid to implementers of the
DHC protocol, and to future editors of the underlying RFCs and
selected, current Internet-Drafts.  This memo is not being
proposed as a standards-track document, but rather as an aid to
clarify existing and future RFCs.

	 </t>
      </abstract>
   </front>
   <seriesInfo name="Internet-Draft" value="draft-ietf-dhc-client-options-00" />
   
</reference>
