summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc3679.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3679.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc3679.txt451
1 files changed, 451 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3679.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3679.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4e59079
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3679.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,451 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group R. Droms
+Request for Comments: 3679 Cisco Systems
+Category: Informational January 2004
+
+
+ Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option Codes
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+ This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
+ not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
+ memo is unlimited.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
+
+Abstract
+
+ Prior to the publication of RFC 2489 (which was updated by RFC 2939),
+ several option codes were assigned to proposed Dynamic Host
+ Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options that were subsequently never
+ used. This document lists those unused option codes and directs IANA
+ to make these option codes available for assignment to other DHCP
+ options in the future.
+
+ The document also lists several option codes that are not currently
+ documented in an RFC but should not be made available for
+ reassignment to future DHCP options.
+
+1. Introduction
+
+ Section 2 of this document lists the unused DHCP option codes from
+ the IANA list of BOOTP and DHCP option codes [1]. Each option code
+ includes any known documentation and contact information from the
+ IANA list. IANA will make these option codes available for
+ assignment to other DHCP options in the future.
+
+ Section 3 lists several DHCP option codes that are not currently
+ documented in an RFC but should not be made available for
+ reassignment to future DHCP options.
+
+2. Unused DHCP Option Codes to be Reassigned to Future DHCP Options
+
+ The option codes listed in this section are to be returned to IANA
+ for reassignment to new options. Responses from associated contact
+ persons are noted where they have been received.
+
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 1]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+2.1. Service Location Protocol Naming Authority
+
+ Code: 80
+ Name: Service Location Protocol Naming Authority
+ Defined in: (expired Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Charlie Perkins
+ Reason to recover: Never published as standard and not in general use
+
+2.2. Relay Agent Options
+
+ Codes: 83, 84
+ Name: Relay Agent Options
+ Defined in: Early draft of RFC 3046 [2]
+ Contact: (none)
+ Reason to recover: Not defined in RFC 3046 as published
+
+2.3. IEEE 1003.1 POSIX Timezone
+
+ Code: 88
+ Name: IEEE 1003.1 POSIX Timezone
+ Defined in: (expired Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Mike Carney
+ Reason to recover: Never published as standard and not in general use
+
+2.4. FQDNs in DHCP Options
+
+ Code: 89
+ Name: FQDNs in DHCP Options
+ Defined in: (expired Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Ralph Droms; agrees that option code should be
+ reassigned
+ Reason to recover: Never published as standard and not in general use
+
+2.5. VINES TCP/IP Server
+
+ Code: 91
+ Name: VINES TCP/IP Server
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: (none)
+ Reason to recover: Never published as Internet-Draft
+
+2.6. Server Selection
+
+ Code: 92
+ Name: Server Selection
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: (none)
+ Reason to recover: Never published as Internet-Draft
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 2]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+2.7 IPv6 Transition
+
+ Code: 96
+ Name: IPv6 Transition
+ Defined in: (expired Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Dan Harrington; agrees that option code should be
+ reassigned
+ Reason to recover: Never published as standard and not in general use
+
+2.8. Printer Name
+
+ Code: 100
+ Name: Printer Name
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: (none)
+ Reason to recover: Never published as Internet-Draft
+
+2.9. Multicast Assignment through DHCP
+
+ Code: 101
+ Name: Multicast Assignment through DHCP
+ Defined in: (expired Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Baiju Patel, Munil Shah
+ Reason to recover: Never published as standard and not in general use
+
+2.10. Swap Path
+
+ Code: 108
+ Name: Swap Path
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: (none)
+ Reason to recover: Never published as Internet-Draft
+
+2.11. IPX Compatibility
+
+ Code: 110
+ Name: IPX Compatibility
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: Juan Luciani; agrees that option code should be
+ reassigned
+ Reason to recover: Never published as Internet-Draft
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 3]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+2.12. Failover
+
+ Code: 115
+ Name: Failover
+ Defined in: Early revisions of "DHCP Failover Protocol" [3]
+ Contact: Kim Kinnear
+ Reason to recover: Current version of "DHCP Failover Protocol" does
+ not use a DHCP option
+
+3. Option codes to be reserved by IANA
+
+ The option codes listed in this section are the subject of ongoing
+ work in the DHC Working Group (WG). These option codes should remain
+ on the IANA list of assigned option codes [1] until the DHC WG has
+ made a final decision about their disposition.
+
+3.1. Option codes used in PXE Specification
+
+ The following option codes are used in the "Preboot Execution
+ Environment (PXE) Specification, Version 2.1" [4]. However, although
+ these options are in widespread use by devices that use PXE, none of
+ these option codes have been described in a published RFC.
+
+ The DHC WG will endeavor to have specifications for these options
+ published.
+
+3.1.1. Client System
+
+ Code: 93
+ Name: Client System
+ Defined in: "Preboot Execution Environment (PXE)
+ Specification, Version 2.1" [4]
+ Contact: Michael Johnston
+ (frenchy@quiet-like-a-panther.org)
+
+3.1.2. Client NDI
+
+ Code: 94
+ Name: Client NDI
+ Defined in: "Preboot Execution Environment (PXE)
+ Specification, Version 2.1" [4]
+ Contact: Michael Johnston
+ (frenchy@quiet-like-a-panther.org)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 4]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+3.1.3. UUID/GUID Client Identifier
+
+ Code: 97
+ Name: UUID/GUID Client Identifier
+ Defined in: "Preboot Execution Environment (PXE)
+ Specification, Version 2.1" [4] (and an expired
+ Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Dan Harrington, Michael Johnston
+ (frenchy@quiet-like-a-panther.org)
+
+3.2. In Use by Apple
+
+ The following option codes are used by devices from Apple Computer.
+ However, none of these option codes have been described in a
+ published RFC.
+
+ The DHC WG will endeavor to have specifications for these options
+ published.
+
+3.2.1. LDAP Servers
+
+ Code: 95
+ Name: LDAP Servers
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: Dieter Siegmund, dieter@apple.com
+ Reason to recover: Never published in an RFC
+
+3.2.2. Netinfo Parameters
+
+ Codes: 112, 113
+ Name: Netinfo Address, Netinfo Tag
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: Dieter Siegmund, dieter@apple.com
+ Reason to recover: Never published in an RFC
+
+3.2.3. URL
+
+ Code: 114
+ Name: URL
+ Defined in: (none)
+ Contact: Dieter Siegmund, dieter@apple.com
+ Reason to recover: Never published in an RFC
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 5]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+3.3. Option Code Extensions
+
+ Note that these option codes are identified in "Extending DHCP
+ Options Codes" [5] as part of a mechanism for extending the set of
+ option codes available to DHCP. If these option codes are not used
+ for DHCP option code extension, they will be returned to IANA for
+ reassignment to other DHCP options.
+
+ Codes: 126, 127
+ Name: Option Code Extensions
+ Defined in: (expired Internet-Draft)
+ Contact: Ralph Droms
+
+4. Already Returned for Reassignment
+
+ The option codes 99, 102-107, 109 and 111 have already been returned
+ for reassignment to future DHCP options.
+
+5. Security Considerations
+
+ This document has no known security implications, as none of the
+ reclaimed options are known to be in use.
+
+6. IANA Considerations
+
+ IANA has returned the DHCP option codes listed in Section 2 to the
+ list of available option codes. These option codes may be reassigned
+ to new DHCP options, according to the procedures in RFC 2939 [6].
+ IANA is requested to reassign these option codes after the list of
+ option codes that have never been assigned or have previously been
+ returned has been exhausted.
+
+Informative References
+
+ [1] Assigned Numbers Editor, IANA., "BOOTP and DHCP Parameters",
+ http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-parameters, February
+ 2003.
+
+ [2] Patrick, M., "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option", RFC 3046,
+ January 2001.
+
+ [3] Droms, R., Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Rabil,
+ G., Dooley, M. and A. Kapur, "DHCP Failover Protocol", Work in
+ Progress.
+
+ [4] Intel Corporation, "Preboot Execution Environment (PXE)
+ Specification Version 2.1", http://www.pix.net/software/pxeboot/
+ archive/pxespec.pdf, September 1999.
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 6]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+ [5] Volz, B., Droms, R. and T. Lemon, "Extending DHCP Options
+ Codes", Work in Progress.
+
+ [6] Droms, R., "Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of New
+ DHCP Options and Message Types", BCP 43, RFC 2939, September
+ 2000.
+
+Intellectual Property Statement
+
+ The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
+ intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
+ pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
+ this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
+ might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
+ has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
+ IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
+ standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
+ claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
+ licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
+ obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
+ proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
+ be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
+
+ The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
+ copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
+ rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
+ this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
+ Director.
+
+Author's Address
+
+ Ralph Droms
+ Cisco Systems
+ 1414 Massachusetts Avenue
+ Boxborough, MA 01719
+ USA
+
+ Phone: +1 978 936 1674
+ EMail: rdroms@cisco.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 7]
+
+RFC 3679 Unused DHCP Option Codes January 2004
+
+
+Full Copyright Statement
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
+
+ This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
+ others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
+ or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
+ and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
+ kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
+ included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
+ document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
+ the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
+ Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
+ developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
+ copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
+ followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
+ English.
+
+ The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
+ revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.
+
+ This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
+ "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
+ TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
+ BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
+ HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
+ MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Acknowledgement
+
+ Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
+ Internet Society.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Droms Informational [Page 8]
+