From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 1 10:22:18 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A210663E; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 10:22:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from remote.thehowies.com (50-197-91-217-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.197.91.217]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "remote.thehowies.com", Issuer "RapidSSL CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C0122D08; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 10:22:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from PRIMARY.thehowies.local ([fe80::967:7eb6:ee49:3820]) by PRIMARY.thehowies.local ([fe80::967:7eb6:ee49:3820%11]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 03:22:15 -0700 From: John Howie To: "sthaug@nethelp.no" Subject: Re: Patches for BOOTP/DHCP code to support Windows Server DHCP Thread-Topic: Patches for BOOTP/DHCP code to support Windows Server DHCP Thread-Index: AQHPfUBUW2MQdiTIGUuysOzuLv/2xptcPzcAgAC3qoA= Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 10:22:15 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20140601.082448.74710838.sthaug@nethelp.no> In-Reply-To: <20140601.082448.74710838.sthaug@nethelp.no> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.2.140509 x-originating-ip: [203.147.52.194] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <4894C64CE3DA02458F33AE8BB40F8A9F@thehowies.local> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 10:22:18 -0000 Hi Steinar, In short, no, I have no packet traces. Given that the DHCP code in the FreeBSD boot loader and NFS subsystem does not request those options, but that ISC-DHCP does provide them, I will go out on a limb and say that it must be serving them without being asked if they are configured. Regards, John On 6/1/14, 1:24 PM, "sthaug@nethelp.no" wrote: >> Section 3.5 of RFC 2131 (the DHCP RFC) states that "...Second, in its >> initial DHCPDISCOVER or DHCPREQUEST message, a client may provide the >> server with a list of specific parameters the client is interested in" >> and "...The client can inform the server which configuration parameters >> the client is interested in by including the 'parameter request list' >> option." The data portion of this option explicitly lists the options >> requested by tag number. A DHCP Server is not required to return any >> parameter that a client does not ask for. It appears that the ISC-DHCP >> server, which is recommended by most, will return configured options >> regardless of whether or not the client asks for them. > >As far as I know this is wrong. ISC DHCP does *not* behave this way. >Do you have packet sniffer traces to indicate oterwise? > >In any case - yes, the client should absolutely request all the >parameters it wants. > >Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no