Subject: [dhcwg] dhc WG last call on "Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6"

From: Stig Venaas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:13:53 +0200

This message announces a WG last call on "Domain Suffix Option for
DHCPv6" <draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain-02.txt>.  The last call
will conclude at 1700 ET on 2006-04-30.

Note that there was a previous last call for revision 00 of this draft. 
There were several responses during that last call, and I believe this 
version resolves the issues raised.

Please respond to this WG last call.  If you support acceptance of the
document without change, respond with a simple acknowledgment, so that
support for the document can be assessed.  Lack of discussion does not
represent positive support.  If there is no expression of support for
acceptance during the WG last call, the document will not be advanced
to the IESG.

"Domain Suffix Option for DHCPv6" specifies an option passed from
server to client to specify a domain suffix name to be used for
domain name updates.  This draft is available as
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-dnsdomain-02.txt

Stig

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 22:42:10 -0700

> will conclude at 1700 ET on 2006-04-30.

I support acceptance of the document.   I would like to suggest one minor 
editorial change, but this is not important, and I am fine with the document 
going through last call as is - if it seems right to make the change, it can 
be done in the final editing process.   The change is in the introduction:

   This document describes a new option for DHCPv6 [RFC3315] that 
   provides a mechanism for the transfer of a domain name suffix.

Instead I think it would be clearer to say:

   This document describes a new option for DHCPv6 [RFC3315] that 
   provides a mechanism for specifying a domain name suffix.

But as I say, this is a minor point, and I would like to see the document 
advance as is rather than to go through a third last call over this issue.

Thanks!