DHCP option 82 behavior

[Curt Rask]

In this case, I know that the DHCP snooper will remove the option 82 
information that was added prior to sending it back to the client.  Not 
that that necessarily helps matters, much.

David W. Hankins wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 01:59:07PM -0400, Curt Rask wrote:
> 
>>In reading the RFC, it suggests that anytime a DHCP server receives 
>>option 82 information, it should always be contained in the reply or 
>>whatever communication is going back to the client.  Does anyone know of 
>>a way to enable the inclusion of option 82 information for a local subnet?
> 
> 
> It's not really clear to me what to do in this case.
> 
> DHCP packets are not allowed to exceed 576 bytes (unless the client
> supplied an option indicating it was capable of more).  We're allowed
> to append relay agent options beyond this limit because the relay will
> strip them out before replying to the client.
> 
> So we want to avoid including relay agent options if we don't know
> for certain that there is an intervening device that will remove the
> option, such as when giaddr is set.  But possibly we should relax this
> when doing so keeps us under the limit still.
> 
> To confound this I think the code currently is 'confused' as to
> wether the relay agent options in its cache came from the packet
> or were fetched from the lease state - the cached option 82
> contents on the lease structure when the client was assigned their
> address.
> 
> You don't want to include option 82 when you respond to the client
> renewals either.
> 
> At any rate, we should look more closely at this.
> 

______________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned by MCI Managed Email Content Service, using Skeptic(tm) technology powered by MessageLabs. For more information on MCI's Managed Email  Content Service, visit http://www.mci.com.
______________________________________________________________________