Subject: Re: [dhcwg] dhc wg last call on draft-ietf-dhc-pxelinux-01

From: "David W. Hankins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 12:28:23 -0700

On Fri, Jun 29, 2007 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
> I fully support this document moving forward.

Thank you, Bernie.

> Therefore, I think it makes more sense to just allocate 208 to PXELINUX,
> but call it a deprecated option. Then if 10 years from now we're out of
> option codes, we could reclaim it. But, if we never need it, no harm
> done. I also think this is easier than tagging it as "last resort".

I think you're right, and rather wonder why I didn't think of that
first.

The objective is just to 'mark the landmine'.  I've made the changes
in my sources

> 1. Rename section 6 to "Reboot Time Option".

Fixed in my sources.

> 2. Perhaps the title should just be "PXELINUX Options"? As 'Site Local'
> are now redefined (per RFC 3942) and as this just documents the PXELINUX
> usage.

I sort of agree.  Both the old and new titles aren't very informative
if you don't know what 'option' means contextually.

  <title abbrev="PXELINUX Options">Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
	Options Used by PXELINUX</title>

?

More nits;

Per Stig (some time ago), I simplified the abstract (so as to remove
references).  This does mean that I had to place references in the
introduction.

Some capitalizations in the introduction's summary list of options
being documented.

> I don't think there would be need to respind this document for any of
> these (if adopted) - they can be handled as notes to the RFC-Editor?

I don't know.  If we get too many more nits, I wouldn't object to
respinning it just to simplify the process for the editor.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		     you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		-- Jack T. Hankins
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

---

From: Stig Venaas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:03:35 +0200

We did not get much input during the wglc, but since this is just an
informational document documenting an existing protocol we believe it is 
sufficient.

I think it's good if you can post another revision with the minor 
changes discussed below before we pass it on to the IESG. Also please
run it through the idnits tool to check that there are no issues.

Stig

David W. Hankins wrote:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

---

From: "David W. Hankins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 11:07:42 -0500

> run it through the idnits tool to check that there are no issues.

Done and done.

-- 
Ash bugud-gul durbatuluk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
Why settle for the lesser evil?	 https://secure.isc.org/store/t-shirt/
-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		     you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		-- Jack T. Hankins
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg