On Nov 11, 2010, at 8:40 PM, David W. Hankins wrote: > On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 05:17:03PM -0800, Ted Lemon wrote: >> Do I take this to mean that you are not in favor of the use of the >> search path with this option? > > That's one workaround. I am neither for nor against it. The search > path behavior was required in the WG discussions that were causative > in the -06 revision of the draft. I am simply reflecting that > discussion and consensus.
David: I've not heard a very strong case for that search path and I certainly do not believe this is the consensus of the working group. I understand that the exact behavior of a DHCP client receiving a FQDN option is not necessarily covered adequately in DHC documents, but I do not think this is the time now to embark in such an endeavor. At the moment, I believe that this should be left at the discretion of implementors. - Alain. _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
