[e2e] TCP Option Negotiation

[Vernon Schryver]

> From: Ralph Droms <rdroms at cisco.com>

> I've had discussions about enforcing a quiet time in DHCP - a minimum delay 
> time before reassigning an address to a new host.
>
> We've never heard a sufficiently strong argument to warrant adding the 
> requirement to the DHCP spec.

Unless you assume the previous client does a DHCPRELEASE, won't
there be an effective quite time of averaging half the lease period,
and won't that be longer than the TCP MSL?

Does any client do a DHCPRELEASE in real life?  I've tried to make some
Windows boxes send DHCPRELEASE's in obvious situations (e.g. shutdown),
but failed completely.


>                                I don't know of any servers that implement a 
> quiet time.

For whatever it might be worth, please consider the recent question
in either the main IETF mailing list or the DHCP WG mailing list
from someone complaining about a "Assembly Line DHCP - Grace Period
Problem" and pointing at what I understood to be
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q153/0/72.asp or
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q261/9/64.ASP

4 or 24 hours plus the remaining lease time sounds like enough of a quiet
time for most purposes.


Vernon Schryver    vjs at rhyolite.com