From owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jun  1 13:01:51 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@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 A8FD42CA;
 Sun,  1 Jun 2014 13:01:51 +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 82A4C2B0E;
 Sun,  1 Jun 2014 13:01:50 +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 06:01:48 -0700
From: John Howie <john@thehowies.com>
To: "sthaug@nethelp.no" <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/2xptcPzcAgAC3qoD//66HgP//k2Lc
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2014 13:01:48 +0000
Message-ID: <0FF4F173-8D6A-4664-AA31-FB1BF28A7E74@thehowies.com>
References: <CFB0A140.426CB%john@thehowies.com>
 <20140601.082448.74710838.sthaug@nethelp.no>
 <CFB110B6.42746%john@thehowies.com>,
 <20140601.143033.41674928.sthaug@nethelp.no>
In-Reply-To: <20140601.143033.41674928.sthaug@nethelp.no>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>,
 "freebsd-arm@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>,
 "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." <freebsd-arm.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arm>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arm/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arm@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arm-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 13:01:51 -0000

Hi Steinar,

I could ask you to 'prove it', too, but I can easily check when I get back =
from my current travels :-)

It important to note that even if it does (as I think it does) it is NOT in=
 violation of the RFC. The RFC simply says that if a client wants something=
 it should ask for it, and not that a server cannot send the options unsoli=
cited.

Best regards,

John

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 1, 2014, at 19:30, "sthaug@nethelp.no" <sthaug@nethelp.no> wrote:

>> 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, bu=
t
>> 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.
>=20
> In that case I'm afraid I must stand by my claim that you're wrong
> and ISC DHCP does *not* provide configured options unless the client
> asks for them.
>=20
> (And I have copious amounts of packet sniffer traces to prove this.)
>=20
> Not that this is particularly relevant to FreeBSD any more...
>=20
> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no