Rapid Commit Option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4)
RFC 4039
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.
(Margaret Cullen; former steering group member) Yes
(Alex Zinin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Allison Mankin; former steering group member) No Objection
(Bert Wijnen; former steering group member) No Objection
(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection
(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection
(Harald Alvestrand; former steering group member) No Objection
I do wonder about whether saving these 2 messages will really save any time. Reviewed by Spencer Dawkins, Gen-ART His review: I'm reviewing this specification as a Working Group Submission for Proposed Standard. This document is mostly ready to go. I didn't even see nits. It's well-written and explains its motivation clearly. I have one comment - the example given in Figure 1 shows what happens when you have two DHCP servers on a subnet, but only one of them supports Rapid Commit. It would be really nice to have a second short discussion that shows the same flow when both servers support Rapid Commit. I THINK I know what's supposed to happen, based on side comments in the discussion of Figure 1, and I even think that what's supposed to happen would actually work, but it would be clearer if this was broken out separately. This is a nice short document, so I'll be a good sport and point out that it makes sense to delete the discussion of "one server on a subnet". The discussion on "one server on a subnet" in this draft seems to be skating along the edge of "wireless topology = IP subnet topology", and this isn't true in the general case, except by accident. If there's any part of this solution that relies on "one server on a subnet", that's bad, because it will break the second you have multipath reflection from another subnet, and it will also break the second someone plugs in another router without wondering if there's already a Rapid Commit router plugged in. I don't THINK this will happen, but that's because the protocol specified is safe whether or not the router is the only one on the subnet or not.
(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection
(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection
(Scott Hollenbeck; former steering group member) No Objection
(Steven Bellovin; former steering group member) No Objection
-
(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection
(Thomas Narten; former steering group member) No Objection