ISC-DHCP-REFERENCES: ISC DHCP References Collection

From 2c85ac9b241cea50c6579b209772c8664ab6e5d1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Shawn Routhier Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 18:52:21 +0000 Subject: Switch isc urls from http to https and correct sw to services or software for new web site as appropirate. --- doc/Makefile | 2 +- doc/References.html | 606 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------ doc/References.txt | 504 +++++++++++++++---------------- doc/References.xml | 8 +- doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient-script.8 | 8 +- doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.8 | 6 +- doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.conf.5 | 8 +- doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.leases.5 | 8 +- doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-eval.5 | 8 +- doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-options.5 | 8 +- 10 files changed, 601 insertions(+), 565 deletions(-) (limited to 'doc') diff --git a/doc/Makefile b/doc/Makefile index 03b27dcf..cccbbe66 100644 --- a/doc/Makefile +++ b/doc/Makefile @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ # 950 Charter Street # Redwood City, CA 94063 # -# http://www.isc.org/ +# https://www.isc.org/ all: References.txt References.html diff --git a/doc/References.html b/doc/References.html index 8f8a6814..a29f9da7 100644 --- a/doc/References.html +++ b/doc/References.html @@ -1,139 +1,157 @@ ISC-DHCP-REFERENCES: ISC DHCP References Collection - + - - + td.header { + font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: x-small; + vertical-align: top; width: 33%; + color: #FFF; background-color: #666; + } + td.author { font-weight: bold; font-size: x-small; margin-left: 4em; } + td.author-text { font-size: x-small; } + + /* info code from SantaKlauss at http://www.madaboutstyle.com/tooltip2.html */ + a.info { + /* This is the key. */ + position: relative; + z-index: 24; + text-decoration: none; + } + a.info:hover { + z-index: 25; + color: #FFF; background-color: #900; + } + a.info span { display: none; } + a.info:hover span.info { + /* The span will display just on :hover state. */ + display: block; + position: absolute; + font-size: smaller; + top: 2em; left: -5em; width: 15em; + padding: 2px; border: 1px solid #333; + color: #900; background-color: #EEE; + text-align: left; + } + + a { font-weight: bold; } + a:link { color: #900; background-color: transparent; } + a:visited { color: #633; background-color: transparent; } + a:active { color: #633; background-color: transparent; } + + p { margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; } + p.copyright { font-size: x-small; } + p.toc { font-size: small; font-weight: bold; margin-left: 3em; } + table.toc { margin: 0 0 0 3em; padding: 0; border: 0; vertical-align: text-top; } + td.toc { font-size: small; font-weight: bold; vertical-align: text-top; } + + ol.text { margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; } + ul.text { margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 2em; } + li { margin-left: 3em; } + + /* RFC-2629 s and s. */ + em { font-style: italic; } + strong { font-weight: bold; } + dfn { font-weight: bold; font-style: normal; } + cite { font-weight: normal; font-style: normal; } + tt { color: #036; } + tt, pre, pre dfn, pre em, pre cite, pre span { + font-family: "Courier New", Courier, monospace; font-size: small; + } + pre { + text-align: left; padding: 4px; + color: #000; background-color: #CCC; + } + pre dfn { color: #900; } + pre em { color: #66F; background-color: #FFC; font-weight: normal; } + pre .key { color: #33C; font-weight: bold; } + pre .id { color: #900; } + pre .str { color: #000; background-color: #CFF; } + pre .val { color: #066; } + pre .rep { color: #909; } + pre .oth { color: #000; background-color: #FCF; } + pre .err { background-color: #FCC; } + + /* RFC-2629 s. */ + table.all, table.full, table.headers, table.none { + font-size: small; text-align: center; border-width: 2px; + vertical-align: top; border-collapse: collapse; + } + table.all, table.full { border-style: solid; border-color: black; } + table.headers, table.none { border-style: none; } + th { + font-weight: bold; border-color: black; + border-width: 2px 2px 3px 2px; + } + table.all th, table.full th { border-style: solid; } + table.headers th { border-style: none none solid none; } + table.none th { border-style: none; } + table.all td { + border-style: solid; border-color: #333; + border-width: 1px 2px; + } + table.full td, table.headers td, table.none td { border-style: none; } + + hr { height: 1px; } + hr.insert { + width: 80%; border-style: none; border-width: 0; + color: #CCC; background-color: #CCC; + } +--> -

TOC

- +

ISC-DHCP-REFERENCES	D. Hankins
	ISC
	August 2006
	May 2007

ISC DHCP References Collection

Copyright Notice

Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for @@ -206,8 +224,9 @@ Author's Address

TOC

1. Introduction

TOC

1. +Introduction

As a little historical anecdote, ISC DHCP once packaged all the relevant RFCs and standards documents along with the software @@ -226,8 +245,9 @@ Author's Address
managed to implement them.

TOC

2. Definition: Reference Implementation

TOC

2. +Definition: Reference Implementation

ISC DHCP, much like its other cousins in ISC software, is self-described as a 'Reference Implementation.' There has been @@ -291,8 +311,9 @@ Author's Address
on the Internet with the will to participate has a say.

TOC

3. Low Layer References

TOC

3. +Low Layer References

It may surprise you to realize that ISC DHCP implements 802.1 'Ethernet' framing, Token Ring, and FDDI. In order to bridge the @@ -306,7 +327,7 @@ Author's Address

There are a few things that DHCP servers, relays, and clients all need to do in order to speak the DHCP protocol in strict compliance - with RFC2131 (Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” March 1997.) [8]. + with RFC2131 (Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” March 1997.) [RFC2131].

Transmit a UDP packet from IP:0.0.0.0 Ethernet:Self, destined to @@ -332,7 +353,7 @@ Author's Address
Many unix implementations will transmit broadcasts not to 255.255.255.255, but to x.y.z.255 (where x.y.z is the system's local subnet). Such packets are not received by several known DHCP client - implementations - and it's not their fault, RFC2131 (Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” March 1997.) [8] very explicitly demands that these packets' IP + implementations - and it's not their fault, RFC2131 (Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” March 1997.) [RFC2131] very explicitly demands that these packets' IP destination addresses be set to 255.255.255.255.

Receiving packets sent to 255.255.255.255 isn't a problem on most @@ -368,49 +389,55 @@ Author's Address
address has been configured, unless it is done with raw sockets.

TOC

3.1. Ethernet Protocol References

TOC

3.1. +Ethernet Protocol References

ISC DHCP Implements Ethernet Version 2 ("DIX"), which is a variant of IEEE 802.2. No good reference of this framing is known to exist - at this time, but it is vaguely described in RFC894 (Hornig, C., “Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet networks,” April 1984.) [3] (see the section titled "Packet format"), and + at this time, but it is vaguely described in RFC894 (Hornig, C., “Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet networks,” April 1984.) [RFC0894] (see the section titled "Packet format"), and the following URL is also thought to be useful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIX

TOC

3.2. Token Ring Protocol References

TOC

3.2. +Token Ring Protocol References

IEEE 802.5 defines the Token Ring framing format used by ISC DHCP.

TOC

RFC760 (Postel, J., “DoD standard Internet Protocol,” January 1980.) [RFC0760] fundamentally defines the bare IPv4 protocol which ISC DHCP implements.

TOC

3.5. Unicast Datagram Protocol References

TOC

3.5. +Unicast Datagram Protocol References

RFC768 (Postel, J., “User Datagram Protocol,” August 1980.) [2] defines the User Datagram +

RFC768 (Postel, J., “User Datagram Protocol,” August 1980.) [RFC0768] defines the User Datagram Protocol that ultimately carries the DHCP or BOOTP protocol. The destination DHCP server port is 67, the client port is 68. Source ports are irrelevant.

TOC

4. BOOTP Protocol References

TOC

4. +BOOTP Protocol References

The DHCP Protocol is strange among protocols in that it is grafted over the top of another protocol - BOOTP (but we don't @@ -419,25 +446,28 @@ Author's Address
use of both BOOTP header fields and the trailing 'options' space.

The ISC DHCP server supports BOOTP clients conforming to - RFC951 (Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, “Bootstrap Protocol,” September 1985.) [4] and RFC1542 (Wimer, W., “Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol,” October 1993.) [7]. + RFC951 (Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, “Bootstrap Protocol,” September 1985.) [RFC0951] and RFC1542 (Wimer, W., “Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol,” October 1993.) [RFC1542].

TOC

5. DHCP Protocol References

TOC

5. +DHCP Protocol References

TOC

5.1. DHCPv4 Protocol

TOC

5.1. +DHCPv4 Protocol

"The DHCP[v4] Protocol" is not defined in a single document. The following collection of references of what ISC DHCP terms "The DHCPv4 Protocol".

TOC

5.1.1. Core Protocol References

TOC

5.1.1. +Core Protocol References

RFC2131 (Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” March 1997.) [8] defines the protocol format +

RFC2131 (Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” March 1997.) [RFC2131] defines the protocol format and procedures. ISC DHCP is not known to diverge from this document in any way. There are, however, a few points on which different implementations have arisen out of vagueries in the document. @@ -457,7 +487,7 @@ Author's Address
or relay, which may not be zero. It is not known if there is a good reason for this that has not been documented.

RFC2132 (Alexander, S. and R. Droms, “DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions,” March 1997.) [9] defines the initial set of +

RFC2132 (Alexander, S. and R. Droms, “DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions,” March 1997.) [RFC2132] defines the initial set of DHCP Options and provides a great deal of guidance on how to go about formatting and processing options. The document unfortunately waffles to a great extent about the NULL termination of DHCP Options, @@ -469,11 +499,12 @@ Author's Address
known text option it receives prior to any other processing.

TOC

5.2. DHCPv6 Protocol References

TOC

5.2. +DHCPv6 Protocol References

For now there is only one document that specifies the DHCPv6 - protocol (there have been no updates yet), RFC3315 (Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” July 2003.) [21]. + protocol (there have been no updates yet), RFC3315 (Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” July 2003.) [RFC3315].

Support for DHCPv6 was added first in version 4.0.0. The server and client support only IA_NA. While the server does support multiple @@ -507,22 +538,23 @@ Author's Address
quite yet been settled, so support is incomplete.

TOC

5.3. DHCP Option References

TOC

5.3. +DHCP Option References

RFC2241 (Provan, D., “DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services,” November 1997.) [10] defines options for +

RFC2241 (Provan, D., “DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services,” November 1997.) [RFC2241] defines options for Novell Directory Services.

RFC2242 (Droms, R. and K. Fong, “NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information,” November 1997.) [11] defines an encapsulated +

RFC2242 (Droms, R. and K. Fong, “NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information,” November 1997.) [RFC2242] defines an encapsulated option space for NWIP configuration.

RFC2485 (Drach, S., “DHCP Option for The Open Group's User Authentication Protocol,” January 1999.) [12] defines the Open Group's +

RFC2485 (Drach, S., “DHCP Option for The Open Group's User Authentication Protocol,” January 1999.) [RFC2485] defines the Open Group's UAP option.

RFC2610 (Perkins, C. and E. Guttman, “DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol,” June 1999.) [13] defines options for +

RFC2610 (Perkins, C. and E. Guttman, “DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol,” June 1999.) [RFC2610] defines options for the Service Location Protocol (SLP).

RFC2937 (Smith, C., “The Name Service Search Option for DHCP,” September 2000.) [14] defines the Name Service +

RFC2937 (Smith, C., “The Name Service Search Option for DHCP,” September 2000.) [RFC2937] defines the Name Service Search Option (not to be confused with the domain-search option). The Name Service Search Option allows eg nsswitch.conf to be reconfigured via dhcp. The ISC DHCP server implements this option, @@ -531,100 +563,102 @@ Author's Address
dhclient-script process this option in a way that is suitable for the system.

RFC3004 (Stump, G., Droms, R., Gu, Y., Vyaghrapuri, R., Demirtjis, A., Beser, B., and J. Privat, “The User Class Option for DHCP,” November 2000.) [16] defines the User-Class +

RFC3004 (Stump, G., Droms, R., Gu, Y., Vyaghrapuri, R., Demirtjis, A., Beser, B., and J. Privat, “The User Class Option for DHCP,” November 2000.) [RFC3004] defines the User-Class option. Note carefully that ISC DHCP currently does not implement to this reference, but has (inexplicably) selected an incompatible format: a plain text string.

RFC3011 (Waters, G., “The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP,” November 2000.) [17] defines the Subnet-Selection +

RFC3011 (Waters, G., “The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP,” November 2000.) [RFC3011] defines the Subnet-Selection plain DHCPv4 option. Do not confuse this option with the relay agent "link selection" sub-option, although their behaviour is similar.

RFC3319 (Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers,” July 2003.) [22] defines the SIP server +

RFC3319 (Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers,” July 2003.) [RFC3319] defines the SIP server options for DHCPv6.

RFC3396 (Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, “Encoding Long Options in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4),” November 2002.) [23] documents both how long +

RFC3396 (Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, “Encoding Long Options in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4),” November 2002.) [RFC3396] documents both how long options may be encoded in DHCPv4 packets, and also how multiple instances of the same option code within a DHCPv4 packet will be decoded by receivers.

RFC3397 (Aboba, B. and S. Cheshire, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Domain Search Option,” November 2002.) [24] documents the Domain-Search +

RFC3397 (Aboba, B. and S. Cheshire, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Domain Search Option,” November 2002.) [RFC3397] documents the Domain-Search Option, which allows the configuration of the /etc/resolv.conf - 'search' parameter in a way that is RFC1035 (Mockapetris, P., “Domain names - implementation and specification,” November 1987.) [5] wire format compatible (in fact, it uses the RFC1035 wire + 'search' parameter in a way that is RFC1035 (Mockapetris, P., “Domain names - implementation and specification,” November 1987.) [RFC1035] wire format compatible (in fact, it uses the RFC1035 wire format). ISC DHCP has both client and server support, and supports RFC1035 name compression.

RFC3646 (Droms, R., “DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” December 2003.) [27] documents the DHCPv6 +

RFC3646 (Droms, R., “DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” December 2003.) [RFC3646] documents the DHCPv6 name-servers and domain-search options.

RFC3633 (Troan, O. and R. Droms, “IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6,” December 2003.) [26] documents the Identity +

RFC3633 (Troan, O. and R. Droms, “IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6,” December 2003.) [RFC3633] documents the Identity Association Prefix Delegation, which is included here for protocol wire reference, but which is not supported by ISC DHCP.

RFC3679 (Droms, R., “Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option Codes,” January 2004.) [28] documents a number of +

RFC3679 (Droms, R., “Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option Codes,” January 2004.) [RFC3679] documents a number of options that were documented earlier in history, but were not made use of.

RFC3898 (Kalusivalingam, V., “Network Information Service (NIS) Configuration Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” October 2004.) [29] documents four NIS options +

RFC3898 (Kalusivalingam, V., “Network Information Service (NIS) Configuration Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” October 2004.) [RFC3898] documents four NIS options for delivering NIS servers and domain information in DHCPv6.

RFC3925 (Littlefield, J., “Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4),” October 2004.) [30] documents a pair of +

RFC3925 (Littlefield, J., “Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4),” October 2004.) [RFC3925] documents a pair of Enterprise-ID delimited option spaces for vendors to use in order to inform servers of their "vendor class" (sort of like 'uname' or 'who and what am I'), and a means to deliver vendor-specific and vendor-documented option codes and values.

RFC3942 (Volz, B., “Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options,” November 2004.) [31] redefined the 'site local' +

RFC3942 (Volz, B., “Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options,” November 2004.) [RFC3942] redefined the 'site local' option space.

RFC4075 (Kalusivalingam, V., “Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Configuration Option for DHCPv6,” May 2005.) [32] defines the DHCPv6 SNTP +

RFC4075 (Kalusivalingam, V., “Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Configuration Option for DHCPv6,” May 2005.) [RFC4075] defines the DHCPv6 SNTP Servers option.

RFC4242 (Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, “Information Refresh Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” November 2005.) [33] defines the Information +

RFC4242 (Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, “Information Refresh Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” November 2005.) [RFC4242] defines the Information Refresh Time option, which advises DHCPv6 Information-Request clients to return for updated information.

RFC4280 (Chowdhury, K., Yegani, P., and L. Madour, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and Multicast Control Servers,” November 2005.) [34] defines two BCMS server +

RFC4280 (Chowdhury, K., Yegani, P., and L. Madour, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and Multicast Control Servers,” November 2005.) [RFC4280] defines two BCMS server options.

RFC4388 (Woundy, R. and K. Kinnear, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Leasequery,” February 2006.) [35] defined the DHCPv4 +

RFC4388 (Woundy, R. and K. Kinnear, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Leasequery,” February 2006.) [RFC4388] defined the DHCPv4 LEASEQUERY message type and a number of suitable response messages, for the purpose of sharing information about DHCP served addresses and clients.

RFC4580> (Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option,” June 2006.) [36] defines a DHCPv6 +

RFC4580 (Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option,” June 2006.) [RFC4580] defines a DHCPv6 subscriber-id option, which is similar in principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent option of the same name.

RFC4649 (Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option,” August 2006.) [37] defines a DHCPv6 remote-id +

RFC4649 (Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option,” August 2006.) [RFC4649] defines a DHCPv6 remote-id option, which is similar in principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent remote-id.

TOC

5.3.1. Relay Agent Information Option Options

TOC

5.3.1. +Relay Agent Information Option Options

RFC3046 (Patrick, M., “DHCP Relay Agent Information Option,” January 2001.) [18] defines the Relay Agent +

RFC3046 (Patrick, M., “DHCP Relay Agent Information Option,” January 2001.) [RFC3046] defines the Relay Agent Information Option and provides a number of sub-option definitions.

RFC3256 (Jones, D. and R. Woundy, “The DOCSIS (Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications) Device Class DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Sub-option,” April 2002.) [20] defines the DOCSIS Device +

RFC3527 (Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Johnson, R., and J. Kumarasamy, “Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option for DHCPv4,” April 2003.) [25] defines the Link Selection +

RFC3527 (Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Johnson, R., and J. Kumarasamy, “Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option for DHCPv4,” April 2003.) [RFC3527] defines the Link Selection sub-option.

TOC

5.3.2. Dynamic DNS Updates References

TOC

5.3.2. +Dynamic DNS Updates References

The collection of documents that describe the standards-based method to update dns names of DHCP clients starts most easily - with RFC4703 (Stapp, M. and B. Volz, “Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Clients,” October 2006.) [40] to define the overall - architecture, travels through RFCs 4702 (Stapp, M., Volz, B., and Y. Rekhter, “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” October 2006.) [39] - and 4704 (Volz, B., “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” October 2006.) [41] to describe the DHCPv4 and + with RFC4703 (Stapp, M. and B. Volz, “Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Clients,” October 2006.) [RFC4703] to define the overall + architecture, travels through RFCs 4702 (Stapp, M., Volz, B., and Y. Rekhter, “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” October 2006.) [RFC4702] + and 4704 (Volz, B., “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” October 2006.) [RFC4704] to describe the DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 FQDN options (to carry the client name), and ends up at - RFC4701 (Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, “A DNS Resource Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR),” October 2006.) [38] which describes the DHCID + RFC4701 (Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, “A DNS Resource Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR),” October 2006.) [RFC4701] which describes the DHCID RR used in DNS to perform a kind of atomic locking.

ISC DHCP adoped early versions of these documents, and has not @@ -649,8 +683,9 @@ Author's Address
as no other value really makes sense in our context.

TOC

5.3.3. Experimental: Failover References

TOC

5.3.3. +Experimental: Failover References

The Failover Protocol defines a means by which two DHCP Servers can share all the relevant information about leases granted to @@ -665,7 +700,7 @@ Author's Address
implementation of it has proven stable and suitable for use in sizable production environments.

draft-ietf-dhc-failover-12.txt (Droms, R., “DHCP Failover Protocol,” March 2003.) [42] +

draft-ietf-dhc-failover-12.txt (Droms, R., “DHCP Failover Protocol,” March 2003.) [draft‑failover] describes the Failover Protocol. In addition to what is described in this document, ISC DHCP has elected to make some experimental changes that may be revoked in a future version of ISC DHCP (if the @@ -680,111 +715,112 @@ Author's Address
number assignment for this state. As a consequence, ISC DHCP has elected to use the value 254.

RFC3074 (Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Lemon, T., and R. Stevens, “DHC Load Balancing Algorithm,” February 2001.) [19] describes the Load Balancing +

RFC3074 (Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Lemon, T., and R. Stevens, “DHC Load Balancing Algorithm,” February 2001.) [RFC3074] describes the Load Balancing Algorithm (LBA) that ISC DHCP uses in concert with the Failover protocol. Note that versions 3.0.* are known to misimplement the hash algorithm (it will only use the low 4 bits of every byte of the hash bucket array).

TOC

5.4. DHCP Procedures

TOC

5.4. +DHCP Procedures

RFC2939 (Droms, R., “Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of New DHCP Options and Message Types,” September 2000.) [15] explains how to go about +

RFC2939 (Droms, R., “Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of New DHCP Options and Message Types,” September 2000.) [RFC2939] explains how to go about obtaining a new DHCP Option code assignment.

TOC

6. References

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

[1]	Postel, J., “DoD standard Internet Protocol,” RFC 760, January 1980.
[2]	Postel, J., “User Datagram Protocol,” STD 6, RFC 768, August 1980.
[3]	Hornig, C., “Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet networks,” STD 41, RFC 894, April 1984.
[4]	Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, “Bootstrap Protocol,” RFC 951, September 1985.
[5]	Mockapetris, P., “Domain names - implementation and specification,” STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[6]	Katz, D., “Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams over FDDI Networks,” RFC 1188, October 1990.
[7]	Wimer, W., “Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol,” RFC 1542, October 1993.
[8]	Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” RFC 2131, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[9]	Alexander, S. and R. Droms, “DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions,” RFC 2132, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[10]	Provan, D., “DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services,” RFC 2241, November 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[11]	Droms, R. and K. Fong, “NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information,” RFC 2242, November 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[12]	Drach, S., “DHCP Option for The Open Group's User Authentication Protocol,” RFC 2485, January 1999 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[13]	Perkins, C. and E. Guttman, “DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol,” RFC 2610, June 1999.
[14]	Smith, C., “The Name Service Search Option for DHCP,” RFC 2937, September 2000.
[15]	Droms, R., “Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of New DHCP Options and Message Types,” BCP 43, RFC 2939, September 2000.
[16]	Stump, G., Droms, R., Gu, Y., Vyaghrapuri, R., Demirtjis, A., Beser, B., and J. Privat, “The User Class Option for DHCP,” RFC 3004, November 2000.
[17]	Waters, G., “The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP,” RFC 3011, November 2000.
[18]	Patrick, M., “DHCP Relay Agent Information Option,” RFC 3046, January 2001.
[19]	Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Lemon, T., and R. Stevens, “DHC Load Balancing Algorithm,” RFC 3074, February 2001.
[20]	Jones, D. and R. Woundy, “The DOCSIS (Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications) Device Class DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Sub-option,” RFC 3256, April 2002.
[21]	Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 3315, July 2003.
[22]	Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers,” RFC 3319, July 2003.
[23]	Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, “Encoding Long Options in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4),” RFC 3396, November 2002.
[24]	Aboba, B. and S. Cheshire, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Domain Search Option,” RFC 3397, November 2002.
[25]	Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Johnson, R., and J. Kumarasamy, “Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option for DHCPv4,” RFC 3527, April 2003.
[26]	Troan, O. and R. Droms, “IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6,” RFC 3633, December 2003.
[27]	Droms, R., “DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 3646, December 2003.
[28]	Droms, R., “Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option Codes,” RFC 3679, January 2004.
[29]	Kalusivalingam, V., “Network Information Service (NIS) Configuration Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 3898, October 2004.
[30]	Littlefield, J., “Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4),” RFC 3925, October 2004.
[31]	Volz, B., “Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options,” RFC 3942, November 2004.
[32]	Kalusivalingam, V., “Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Configuration Option for DHCPv6,” RFC 4075, May 2005.
[33]	Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, “Information Refresh Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 4242, November 2005.
[34]	Chowdhury, K., Yegani, P., and L. Madour, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and Multicast Control Servers,” RFC 4280, November 2005.
[35]	Woundy, R. and K. Kinnear, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Leasequery,” RFC 4388, February 2006.
[36]	Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option,” RFC 4580, June 2006.
[37]	Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option,” RFC 4649, August 2006.
[38]	Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, “A DNS Resource Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR),” RFC 4701, October 2006.
[39]	Stapp, M., Volz, B., and Y. Rekhter, “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” RFC 4702, October 2006.
[40]	Stapp, M. and B. Volz, “Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Clients,” RFC 4703, October 2006.
[41]	Volz, B., “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” RFC 4704, October 2006.
[42]	Droms, R., “DHCP Failover Protocol,” March 2003.
[RFC0760]	Postel, J., “DoD standard Internet Protocol,” RFC 760, January 1980 (TXT).
[RFC0768]	Postel, J., “User Datagram Protocol,” STD 6, RFC 768, August 1980 (TXT).
[RFC0894]	Hornig, C., “Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet networks,” STD 41, RFC 894, April 1984 (TXT).
[RFC0951]	Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, “Bootstrap Protocol,” RFC 951, September 1985 (TXT).
[RFC1035]	Mockapetris, P., “Domain names - implementation and specification,” STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987 (TXT).
[RFC1188]	Katz, D., “Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams over FDDI Networks,” RFC 1188, October 1990 (TXT).
[RFC1542]	Wimer, W., “Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol,” RFC 1542, October 1993 (TXT).
[RFC2131]	Droms, R., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol,” RFC 2131, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[RFC2132]	Alexander, S. and R. Droms, “DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions,” RFC 2132, March 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[RFC2241]	Provan, D., “DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services,” RFC 2241, November 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[RFC2242]	Droms, R. and K. Fong, “NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information,” RFC 2242, November 1997 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[RFC2485]	Drach, S., “DHCP Option for The Open Group's User Authentication Protocol,” RFC 2485, January 1999 (TXT, HTML, XML).
[RFC2610]	Perkins, C. and E. Guttman, “DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol,” RFC 2610, June 1999 (TXT).
[RFC2937]	Smith, C., “The Name Service Search Option for DHCP,” RFC 2937, September 2000 (TXT).
[RFC2939]	Droms, R., “Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of New DHCP Options and Message Types,” BCP 43, RFC 2939, September 2000 (TXT).
[RFC3004]	Stump, G., Droms, R., Gu, Y., Vyaghrapuri, R., Demirtjis, A., Beser, B., and J. Privat, “The User Class Option for DHCP,” RFC 3004, November 2000 (TXT).
[RFC3011]	Waters, G., “The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP,” RFC 3011, November 2000 (TXT).
[RFC3046]	Patrick, M., “DHCP Relay Agent Information Option,” RFC 3046, January 2001 (TXT).
[RFC3074]	Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Lemon, T., and R. Stevens, “DHC Load Balancing Algorithm,” RFC 3074, February 2001 (TXT).
[RFC3256]	Jones, D. and R. Woundy, “The DOCSIS (Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications) Device Class DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Sub-option,” RFC 3256, April 2002 (TXT).
[RFC3315]	Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 3315, July 2003 (TXT).
[RFC3319]	Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers,” RFC 3319, July 2003 (TXT).
[RFC3396]	Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, “Encoding Long Options in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4),” RFC 3396, November 2002 (TXT).
[RFC3397]	Aboba, B. and S. Cheshire, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Domain Search Option,” RFC 3397, November 2002 (TXT).
[RFC3527]	Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Johnson, R., and J. Kumarasamy, “Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option for DHCPv4,” RFC 3527, April 2003 (TXT).
[RFC3633]	Troan, O. and R. Droms, “IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6,” RFC 3633, December 2003 (TXT).
[RFC3646]	Droms, R., “DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 3646, December 2003 (TXT).
[RFC3679]	Droms, R., “Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option Codes,” RFC 3679, January 2004 (TXT).
[RFC3898]	Kalusivalingam, V., “Network Information Service (NIS) Configuration Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 3898, October 2004 (TXT).
[RFC3925]	Littlefield, J., “Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4),” RFC 3925, October 2004 (TXT).
[RFC3942]	Volz, B., “Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options,” RFC 3942, November 2004 (TXT).
[RFC4075]	Kalusivalingam, V., “Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Configuration Option for DHCPv6,” RFC 4075, May 2005 (TXT).
[RFC4242]	Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, “Information Refresh Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6),” RFC 4242, November 2005 (TXT).
[RFC4280]	Chowdhury, K., Yegani, P., and L. Madour, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and Multicast Control Servers,” RFC 4280, November 2005 (TXT).
[RFC4388]	Woundy, R. and K. Kinnear, “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Leasequery,” RFC 4388, February 2006 (TXT).
[RFC4580]	Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option,” RFC 4580, June 2006 (TXT).
[RFC4649]	Volz, B., “Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option,” RFC 4649, August 2006 (TXT).
[RFC4701]	Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, “A DNS Resource Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR),” RFC 4701, October 2006 (TXT).
[RFC4702]	Stapp, M., Volz, B., and Y. Rekhter, “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” RFC 4702, October 2006 (TXT).
[RFC4703]	Stapp, M. and B. Volz, “Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Clients,” RFC 4703, October 2006 (TXT).
[RFC4704]	Volz, B., “The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option,” RFC 4704, October 2006 (TXT).
[draft-failover]	Droms, R., “DHCP Failover Protocol,” March 2003.

TOC

Author's Address

diff --git a/doc/References.txt b/doc/References.txt index 8e656efe..7e9e1ed3 100644 --- a/doc/References.txt +++ b/doc/References.txt @@ -3,15 +3,15 @@ ISC-DHCP-REFERENCES D. Hankins ISC - August 2006 + May 2007 ISC DHCP References Collection - Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2006-2007 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") + Copyright (c) 2006-2007,2009 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. + ("ISC") Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ Abstract Hankins [Page 1] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 Table of Contents @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ Table of Contents 5.3. DHCP Option References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.3.1. Relay Agent Information Option Options . . . . . . . . 10 5.3.2. Dynamic DNS Updates References . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 - 5.3.3. Experimental: Failover References . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 5.3.3. Experimental: Failover References . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.4. DHCP Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 @@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ Table of Contents Hankins [Page 2] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 1. Introduction @@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ Hankins [Page 2] Hankins [Page 3] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 o To produce new externally-visible behaviour, one must first @@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ Hankins [Page 3] There are a few things that DHCP servers, relays, and clients all need to do in order to speak the DHCP protocol in strict compliance - with RFC2131 [8]. + with RFC2131 [RFC2131]. 1. Transmit a UDP packet from IP:0.0.0.0 Ethernet:Self, destined to IP:255.255.255.255 LinkLayer:Broadcast on an unconfigured (no IP @@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ Hankins [Page 3] Hankins [Page 4] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 address yet) interface. @@ -245,8 +245,9 @@ Hankins [Page 4] unix implementations will transmit broadcasts not to 255.255.255.255, but to x.y.z.255 (where x.y.z is the system's local subnet). Such packets are not received by several known DHCP client implementations - - and it's not their fault, RFC2131 [8] very explicitly demands that - these packets' IP destination addresses be set to 255.255.255.255. + - and it's not their fault, RFC2131 [RFC2131] very explicitly demands + that these packets' IP destination addresses be set to + 255.255.255.255. Receiving packets sent to 255.255.255.255 isn't a problem on most modern unixes...so long as the interface is configured. When there @@ -272,15 +273,15 @@ Hankins [Page 4] Modern unixes have opened up some facilities that diminish how much of this sort of nefarious kludgery is necessary, but have not found - the state of affairs absolutely absolved. In particular, one might Hankins [Page 5] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 + the state of affairs absolutely absolved. In particular, one might now unicast without ARP by inserting an entry into the ARP cache prior to transmitting. Unconfigured interfaces remain the sticking point, however...on virtually no modern unixes is it possible to @@ -291,9 +292,9 @@ Hankins [Page 5] ISC DHCP Implements Ethernet Version 2 ("DIX"), which is a variant of IEEE 802.2. No good reference of this framing is known to exist at - this time, but it is vaguely described in RFC894 [3] (see the section - titled "Packet format"), and the following URL is also thought to be - useful. + this time, but it is vaguely described in RFC894 [RFC0894] (see the + section titled "Packet format"), and the following URL is also + thought to be useful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIX @@ -303,19 +304,19 @@ Hankins [Page 5] 3.3. FDDI Protocol References - RFC1188 [6] is the most helpful reference ISC DHCP has used to form - FDDI packets. + RFC1188 [RFC1188] is the most helpful reference ISC DHCP has used to + form FDDI packets. 3.4. Internet Protocol Version 4 References - RFC760 [1] fundamentally defines the bare IPv4 protocol which ISC - DHCP implements. + RFC760 [RFC0760] fundamentally defines the bare IPv4 protocol which + ISC DHCP implements. 3.5. Unicast Datagram Protocol References - RFC768 [2] defines the User Datagram Protocol that ultimately carries - the DHCP or BOOTP protocol. The destination DHCP server port is 67, - the client port is 68. Source ports are irrelevant. + RFC768 [RFC0768] defines the User Datagram Protocol that ultimately + carries the DHCP or BOOTP protocol. The destination DHCP server port + is 67, the client port is 68. Source ports are irrelevant. 4. BOOTP Protocol References @@ -326,15 +327,14 @@ Hankins [Page 5] packet formats - DHCP is merely a conventional use of both BOOTP header fields and the trailing 'options' space. - The ISC DHCP server supports BOOTP clients conforming to RFC951 [4] - and RFC1542 [7]. - + The ISC DHCP server supports BOOTP clients conforming to RFC951 + [RFC0951] and RFC1542 [RFC1542]. Hankins [Page 6] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 5. DHCP Protocol References @@ -347,52 +347,53 @@ Hankins [Page 6] 5.1.1. Core Protocol References - RFC2131 [8] defines the protocol format and procedures. ISC DHCP is - not known to diverge from this document in any way. There are, - however, a few points on which different implementations have arisen - out of vagueries in the document. DHCP Clients exist which, at one - time, present themselves as using a Client Identifier Option which is - equal to the client's hardware address. Later, the client transmits - DHCP packets with no Client Identifier Option present - essentially - identifying themselves using the hardware address. Some DHCP Servers - have been developed which identify this client as a single client. - ISC has interpreted RFC2131 to indicate that these clients must be - treated as two separate entities (and hence two, separate addresses). - Client behaviour (Embedded Windows products) has developed that - relies on the former implementation, and hence is incompatible with - the latter. Also, RFC2131 demands explicitly that some header fields - be zeroed upon certain message types. The ISC DHCP Server instead - copies many of these fields from the packet received from the client - or relay, which may not be zero. It is not known if there is a good - reason for this that has not been documented. - - RFC2132 [9] defines the initial set of DHCP Options and provides a - great deal of guidance on how to go about formatting and processing - options. The document unfortunately waffles to a great extent about - the NULL termination of DHCP Options, and some DHCP Clients (Windows - 95) have been implemented that rely upon DHCP Options containing text - strings to be NULL-terminated (or else they crash). So, ISC DHCP - detects if clients null-terminate the host-name option and, if so, - null terminates any text options it transmits to the client. It also - removes NULL termination from any known text option it receives prior - to any other processing. + RFC2131 [RFC2131] defines the protocol format and procedures. ISC + DHCP is not known to diverge from this document in any way. There + are, however, a few points on which different implementations have + arisen out of vagueries in the document. DHCP Clients exist which, + at one time, present themselves as using a Client Identifier Option + which is equal to the client's hardware address. Later, the client + transmits DHCP packets with no Client Identifier Option present - + essentially identifying themselves using the hardware address. Some + DHCP Servers have been developed which identify this client as a + single client. ISC has interpreted RFC2131 to indicate that these + clients must be treated as two separate entities (and hence two, + separate addresses). Client behaviour (Embedded Windows products) + has developed that relies on the former implementation, and hence is + incompatible with the latter. Also, RFC2131 demands explicitly that + some header fields be zeroed upon certain message types. The ISC + DHCP Server instead copies many of these fields from the packet + received from the client or relay, which may not be zero. It is not + known if there is a good reason for this that has not been + documented. + + RFC2132 [RFC2132] defines the initial set of DHCP Options and + provides a great deal of guidance on how to go about formatting and + processing options. The document unfortunately waffles to a great + extent about the NULL termination of DHCP Options, and some DHCP + Clients (Windows 95) have been implemented that rely upon DHCP + Options containing text strings to be NULL-terminated (or else they + crash). So, ISC DHCP detects if clients null-terminate the host-name + option and, if so, null terminates any text options it transmits to + the client. It also removes NULL termination from any known text + option it receives prior to any other processing. 5.2. DHCPv6 Protocol References For now there is only one document that specifies the DHCPv6 protocol - (there have been no updates yet), RFC3315 [21]. + (there have been no updates yet), RFC3315 [RFC3315]. Support for DHCPv6 was added first in version 4.0.0. The server and client support only IA_NA. While the server does support multiple - IA_NAs within one packet from the client, our client only supports Hankins [Page 7] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 + IA_NAs within one packet from the client, our client only supports sending one. There is no relay support. DHCPv6 introduces some new and uncomfortable ideas to the common @@ -421,16 +422,17 @@ Hankins [Page 7] 5.3. DHCP Option References - RFC2241 [10] defines options for Novell Directory Services. + RFC2241 [RFC2241] defines options for Novell Directory Services. - RFC2242 [11] defines an encapsulated option space for NWIP + RFC2242 [RFC2242] defines an encapsulated option space for NWIP configuration. - RFC2485 [12] defines the Open Group's UAP option. + RFC2485 [RFC2485] defines the Open Group's UAP option. - RFC2610 [13] defines options for the Service Location Protocol (SLP). + RFC2610 [RFC2610] defines options for the Service Location Protocol + (SLP). - RFC2937 [14] defines the Name Service Search Option (not to be + RFC2937 [RFC2937] defines the Name Service Search Option (not to be confused with the domain-search option). The Name Service Search Option allows eg nsswitch.conf to be reconfigured via dhcp. The ISC DHCP server implements this option, and the ISC DHCP client is @@ -438,96 +440,100 @@ Hankins [Page 7] One would need to make their relevant dhclient-script process this option in a way that is suitable for the system. - RFC3004 [16] defines the User-Class option. Note carefully that ISC - DHCP currently does not implement to this reference, but has - (inexplicably) selected an incompatible format: a plain text string. + RFC3004 [RFC3004] defines the User-Class option. Note carefully that Hankins [Page 8] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 + + ISC DHCP currently does not implement to this reference, but has + (inexplicably) selected an incompatible format: a plain text string. - RFC3011 [17] defines the Subnet-Selection plain DHCPv4 option. Do - not confuse this option with the relay agent "link selection" sub- + RFC3011 [RFC3011] defines the Subnet-Selection plain DHCPv4 option. + Do not confuse this option with the relay agent "link selection" sub- option, although their behaviour is similar. - RFC3319 [22] defines the SIP server options for DHCPv6. + RFC3319 [RFC3319] defines the SIP server options for DHCPv6. - RFC3396 [23] documents both how long options may be encoded in DHCPv4 - packets, and also how multiple instances of the same option code - within a DHCPv4 packet will be decoded by receivers. + RFC3396 [RFC3396] documents both how long options may be encoded in + DHCPv4 packets, and also how multiple instances of the same option + code within a DHCPv4 packet will be decoded by receivers. - RFC3397 [24] documents the Domain-Search Option, which allows the - configuration of the /etc/resolv.conf 'search' parameter in a way - that is RFC1035 [5] wire format compatible (in fact, it uses the - RFC1035 wire format). ISC DHCP has both client and server support, - and supports RFC1035 name compression. + RFC3397 [RFC3397] documents the Domain-Search Option, which allows + the configuration of the /etc/resolv.conf 'search' parameter in a way + that is RFC1035 [RFC1035] wire format compatible (in fact, it uses + the RFC1035 wire format). ISC DHCP has both client and server + support, and supports RFC1035 name compression. - RFC3646 [27] documents the DHCPv6 name-servers and domain-search + RFC3646 [RFC3646] documents the DHCPv6 name-servers and domain-search options. - RFC3633 [26] documents the Identity Association Prefix Delegation, - which is included here for protocol wire reference, but which is not - supported by ISC DHCP. + RFC3633 [RFC3633] documents the Identity Association Prefix + Delegation, which is included here for protocol wire reference, but + which is not supported by ISC DHCP. - RFC3679 [28] documents a number of options that were documented + RFC3679 [RFC3679] documents a number of options that were documented earlier in history, but were not made use of. - RFC3898 [29] documents four NIS options for delivering NIS servers - and domain information in DHCPv6. + RFC3898 [RFC3898] documents four NIS options for delivering NIS + servers and domain information in DHCPv6. - RFC3925 [30] documents a pair of Enterprise-ID delimited option + RFC3925 [RFC3925] documents a pair of Enterprise-ID delimited option spaces for vendors to use in order to inform servers of their "vendor class" (sort of like 'uname' or 'who and what am I'), and a means to deliver vendor-specific and vendor-documented option codes and values. - RFC3942 [31] redefined the 'site local' option space. + RFC3942 [RFC3942] redefined the 'site local' option space. - RFC4075 [32] defines the DHCPv6 SNTP Servers option. + RFC4075 [RFC4075] defines the DHCPv6 SNTP Servers option. - RFC4242 [33] defines the Information Refresh Time option, which + RFC4242 [RFC4242] defines the Information Refresh Time option, which advises DHCPv6 Information-Request clients to return for updated information. - RFC4280 [34] defines two BCMS server options. + RFC4280 [RFC4280] defines two BCMS server options. - RFC4388 [35] defined the DHCPv4 LEASEQUERY message type and a number - of suitable response messages, for the purpose of sharing information - about DHCP served addresses and clients. Hankins [Page 9] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 - RFC4580> [36] defines a DHCPv6 subscriber-id option, which is similar - in principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent option of the same name. + RFC4388 [RFC4388] defined the DHCPv4 LEASEQUERY message type and a + number of suitable response messages, for the purpose of sharing + information about DHCP served addresses and clients. - RFC4649 [37] defines a DHCPv6 remote-id option, which is similar in - principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent remote-id. + RFC4580 [RFC4580] defines a DHCPv6 subscriber-id option, which is + similar in principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent option of the same + name. + + RFC4649 [RFC4649] defines a DHCPv6 remote-id option, which is similar + in principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent remote-id. 5.3.1. Relay Agent Information Option Options - RFC3046 [18] defines the Relay Agent Information Option and provides - a number of sub-option definitions. + RFC3046 [RFC3046] defines the Relay Agent Information Option and + provides a number of sub-option definitions. - RFC3256 [20] defines the DOCSIS Device Class sub-option. + RFC3256 [RFC3256] defines the DOCSIS Device Class sub-option. - RFC3527 [25] defines the Link Selection sub-option. + RFC3527 [RFC3527] defines the Link Selection sub-option. 5.3.2. Dynamic DNS Updates References The collection of documents that describe the standards-based method to update dns names of DHCP clients starts most easily with RFC4703 - [40] to define the overall architecture, travels through RFCs 4702 - [39] and 4704 [41] to describe the DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 FQDN options (to - carry the client name), and ends up at RFC4701 [38] which describes - the DHCID RR used in DNS to perform a kind of atomic locking. + [RFC4703] to define the overall architecture, travels through RFCs + 4702 [RFC4702] and 4704 [RFC4704] to describe the DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 + FQDN options (to carry the client name), and ends up at RFC4701 + [RFC4701] which describes the DHCID RR used in DNS to perform a kind + of atomic locking. ISC DHCP adoped early versions of these documents, and has not yet synched up with the final standards versions. @@ -547,20 +553,20 @@ Hankins [Page 9] Rather, all values for such TXT records are reached via an MD5 sum. In short, nothing is compatible, but the principle of the TXT record is the same as the standard DHCID record. However, for DHCPv6 FQDN, - we do use DHCID type code '2', as no other value really makes sense - in our context. - -5.3.3. Experimental: Failover References - - The Failover Protocol defines a means by which two DHCP Servers can Hankins [Page 10] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 + we do use DHCID type code '2', as no other value really makes sense + in our context. + +5.3.3. Experimental: Failover References + + The Failover Protocol defines a means by which two DHCP Servers can share all the relevant information about leases granted to DHCP clients on given networks, so that one of the two servers may fail and be survived by a server that can act responsibly. @@ -573,216 +579,214 @@ Hankins [Page 10] of it has proven stable and suitable for use in sizable production environments. - draft-ietf-dhc-failover-12.txt [42] describes the Failover Protocol. - In addition to what is described in this document, ISC DHCP has - elected to make some experimental changes that may be revoked in a - future version of ISC DHCP (if the draft authors do not adopt the new - behaviour). Specifically, ISC DHCP's POOLREQ behaviour differs - substantially from what is documented in the draft, and the server - also implements a form of 'MAC Address Affinity' which is not - described in the failover document. The full nature of these changes - have been described on the IETF DHC WG mailing list (which has - archives), and also in ISC DHCP's manual pages. Also note that + draft-ietf-dhc-failover-12.txt [draft-failover] describes the + Failover Protocol. In addition to what is described in this + document, ISC DHCP has elected to make some experimental changes that + may be revoked in a future version of ISC DHCP (if the draft authors + do not adopt the new behaviour). Specifically, ISC DHCP's POOLREQ + behaviour differs substantially from what is documented in the draft, + and the server also implements a form of 'MAC Address Affinity' which + is not described in the failover document. The full nature of these + changes have been described on the IETF DHC WG mailing list (which + has archives), and also in ISC DHCP's manual pages. Also note that although this document references a RECOVER-WAIT state, it does not document a protocol number assignment for this state. As a consequence, ISC DHCP has elected to use the value 254. - RFC3074 [19] describes the Load Balancing Algorithm (LBA) that ISC - DHCP uses in concert with the Failover protocol. Note that versions - 3.0.* are known to misimplement the hash algorithm (it will only use - the low 4 bits of every byte of the hash bucket array). + RFC3074 [RFC3074] describes the Load Balancing Algorithm (LBA) that + ISC DHCP uses in concert with the Failover protocol. Note that + versions 3.0.* are known to misimplement the hash algorithm (it will + only use the low 4 bits of every byte of the hash bucket array). 5.4. DHCP Procedures - RFC2939 [15] explains how to go about obtaining a new DHCP Option - code assignment. - -6. References + RFC2939 [RFC2939] explains how to go about obtaining a new DHCP + Option code assignment. - [1] Postel, J., "DoD standard Internet Protocol", RFC 760, - January 1980. - [2] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, - August 1980. +6. References - [3] Hornig, C., "Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over - Ethernet networks", STD 41, RFC 894, April 1984. + [RFC0760] Postel, J., "DoD standard Internet Protocol", RFC 760, + January 1980. - [4] Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, "Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 951, Hankins [Page 11] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 - September 1985. + [RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, + August 1980. - [5] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and - specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. + [RFC0894] Hornig, C., "Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams + over Ethernet networks", STD 41, RFC 894, April 1984. - [6] Katz, D., "Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP - Datagrams over FDDI Networks", RFC 1188, October 1990. + [RFC0951] Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, "Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 951, + September 1985. - [7] Wimer, W., "Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap - Protocol", RFC 1542, October 1993. + [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and + specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. - [8] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 2131, - March 1997. + [RFC1188] Katz, D., "Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP + Datagrams over FDDI Networks", RFC 1188, October 1990. - [9] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor - Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997. + [RFC1542] Wimer, W., "Clarifications and Extensions for the + Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 1542, October 1993. - [10] Provan, D., "DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services", - RFC 2241, November 1997. + [RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", + RFC 2131, March 1997. - [11] Droms, R. and K. Fong, "NetWare/IP Domain Name and - Information", RFC 2242, November 1997. + [RFC2132] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor + Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997. - [12] Drach, S., "DHCP Option for The Open Group's User - Authentication Protocol", RFC 2485, January 1999. + [RFC2241] Provan, D., "DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services", + RFC 2241, November 1997. - [13] Perkins, C. and E. Guttman, "DHCP Options for Service Location - Protocol", RFC 2610, June 1999. + [RFC2242] Droms, R. and K. Fong, "NetWare/IP Domain Name and + Information", RFC 2242, November 1997. - [14] Smith, C., "The Name Service Search Option for DHCP", RFC 2937, - September 2000. + [RFC2485] Drach, S., "DHCP Option for The Open Group's User + Authentication Protocol", RFC 2485, January 1999. - [15] Droms, R., "Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of - New DHCP Options and Message Types", BCP 43, RFC 2939, - September 2000. + [RFC2610] Perkins, C. and E. Guttman, "DHCP Options for Service + Location Protocol", RFC 2610, June 1999. - [16] Stump, G., Droms, R., Gu, Y., Vyaghrapuri, R., Demirtjis, A., - Beser, B., and J. Privat, "The User Class Option for DHCP", - RFC 3004, November 2000. + [RFC2937] Smith, C., "The Name Service Search Option for DHCP", + RFC 2937, September 2000. - [17] Waters, G., "The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP", - RFC 3011, November 2000. + [RFC2939] Droms, R., "Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition + of New DHCP Options and Message Types", BCP 43, RFC 2939, + September 2000. - [18] Patrick, M., "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option", RFC 3046, - January 2001. + [RFC3004] Stump, G., Droms, R., Gu, Y., Vyaghrapuri, R., Demirtjis, + A., Beser, B., and J. Privat, "The User Class Option for + DHCP", RFC 3004, November 2000. - [19] Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Lemon, T., and R. Stevens, "DHC Load - Balancing Algorithm", RFC 3074, February 2001. + [RFC3011] Waters, G., "The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP", Hankins [Page 12] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 + + RFC 3011, November 2000. - [20] Jones, D. and R. Woundy, "The DOCSIS (Data-Over-Cable Service - Interface Specifications) Device Class DHCP (Dynamic Host - Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Sub-option", - RFC 3256, April 2002. + [RFC3046] Patrick, M., "DHCP Relay Agent Information Option", + RFC 3046, January 2001. - [21] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. - Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 - (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. + [RFC3074] Volz, B., Gonczi, S., Lemon, T., and R. Stevens, "DHC Load + Balancing Algorithm", RFC 3074, February 2001. - [22] Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, "Dynamic Host Configuration - Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) - Servers", RFC 3319, July 2003. + [RFC3256] Jones, D. and R. Woundy, "The DOCSIS (Data-Over-Cable + Service Interface Specifications) Device Class DHCP + (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent + Information Sub-option", RFC 3256, April 2002. - [23] Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, "Encoding Long Options in the - Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)", RFC 3396, - November 2002. + [RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., + and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for + IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. - [24] Aboba, B. and S. Cheshire, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol - (DHCP) Domain Search Option", RFC 3397, November 2002. + [RFC3319] Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, "Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol + (SIP) Servers", RFC 3319, July 2003. - [25] Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Johnson, R., and J. Kumarasamy, "Link - Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option for - DHCPv4", RFC 3527, April 2003. + [RFC3396] Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, "Encoding Long Options in the + Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)", RFC 3396, + November 2002. - [26] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host - Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, - December 2003. + [RFC3397] Aboba, B. and S. Cheshire, "Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol (DHCP) Domain Search Option", RFC 3397, + November 2002. - [27] Droms, R., "DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host - Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3646, - December 2003. + [RFC3527] Kinnear, K., Stapp, M., Johnson, R., and J. Kumarasamy, + "Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information + Option for DHCPv4", RFC 3527, April 2003. - [28] Droms, R., "Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) - Option Codes", RFC 3679, January 2004. + [RFC3633] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic + Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, + December 2003. - [29] Kalusivalingam, V., "Network Information Service (NIS) - Configuration Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol - for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3898, October 2004. + [RFC3646] Droms, R., "DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host + Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3646, + December 2003. - [30] Littlefield, J., "Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic - Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4)", RFC 3925, - October 2004. + [RFC3679] Droms, R., "Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol + (DHCP) Option Codes", RFC 3679, January 2004. - [31] Volz, B., "Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol - version 4 (DHCPv4) Options", RFC 3942, November 2004. + [RFC3898] Kalusivalingam, V., "Network Information Service (NIS) + Configuration Options for Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3898, October 2004. - [32] Kalusivalingam, V., "Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) - Configuration Option for DHCPv6", RFC 4075, May 2005. Hankins [Page 13] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 - - - [33] Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, "Information Refresh Time - Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 - (DHCPv6)", RFC 4242, November 2005. - - [34] Chowdhury, K., Yegani, P., and L. Madour, "Dynamic Host - Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and - Multicast Control Servers", RFC 4280, November 2005. - - [35] Woundy, R. and K. Kinnear, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol - (DHCP) Leasequery", RFC 4388, February 2006. - - [36] Volz, B., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 - (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option", RFC 4580, - June 2006. - - [37] Volz, B., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 - (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option", RFC 4649, August 2006. + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 - [38] Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, "A DNS Resource Record - (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) - Information (DHCID RR)", RFC 4701, October 2006. - - [39] Stapp, M., Volz, B., and Y. Rekhter, "The Dynamic Host - Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified Domain - Name (FQDN) Option", RFC 4702, October 2006. - - [40] Stapp, M. and B. Volz, "Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain - Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol - (DHCP) Clients", RFC 4703, October 2006. - - [41] Volz, B., "The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 - (DHCPv6) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option", - RFC 4704, October 2006. - - [42] Droms, R., "DHCP Failover Protocol", March 2003. + [RFC3925] Littlefield, J., "Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for + Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4)", + RFC 3925, October 2004. + [RFC3942] Volz, B., "Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options", RFC 3942, + November 2004. + [RFC4075] Kalusivalingam, V., "Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) + Configuration Option for DHCPv6", RFC 4075, May 2005. + [RFC4242] Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, "Information Refresh + Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for + IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 4242, November 2005. + [RFC4280] Chowdhury, K., Yegani, P., and L. Madour, "Dynamic Host + Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and + Multicast Control Servers", RFC 4280, November 2005. + [RFC4388] Woundy, R. and K. Kinnear, "Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol (DHCP) Leasequery", RFC 4388, February 2006. + [RFC4580] Volz, B., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 + (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Subscriber-ID Option", RFC 4580, + June 2006. + [RFC4649] Volz, B., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 + (DHCPv6) Relay Agent Remote-ID Option", RFC 4649, + August 2006. + [RFC4701] Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, "A DNS Resource + Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration + Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR)", RFC 4701, + October 2006. + [RFC4702] Stapp, M., Volz, B., and Y. Rekhter, "The Dynamic Host + Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified + Domain Name (FQDN) Option", RFC 4702, October 2006. + [RFC4703] Stapp, M. and B. Volz, "Resolution of Fully Qualified + Domain Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host + Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Clients", RFC 4703, + October 2006. + [RFC4704] Volz, B., "The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for + IPv6 (DHCPv6) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) + Option", RFC 4704, October 2006. Hankins [Page 14] - ISC DHCP References Collection August 2006 + ISC DHCP References Collection May 2007 + + + [draft-failover] + Droms, R., "DHCP Failover Protocol", March 2003. Author's Address @@ -814,10 +818,6 @@ Author's Address - - - - diff --git a/doc/References.xml b/doc/References.xml index bca7f2bf..95547aa5 100644 --- a/doc/References.xml +++ b/doc/References.xml @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ - + @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ - Copyright (c) 2006-2007 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. + Copyright (c) 2006-2007,2009 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for @@ -510,7 +510,7 @@ for the purpose of sharing information about DHCP served addresses and clients. - RFC4580> defines a DHCPv6 + RFC4580 defines a DHCPv6 subscriber-id option, which is similar in principle to the DHCPv4 relay agent option of the same name. @@ -660,7 +660,7 @@ - + diff --git a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient-script.8 b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient-script.8 index f6ca4e5c..811e0d3d 100644 --- a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient-script.8 +++ b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient-script.8 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.\" $Id: dhclient-script.8,v 1.2 2005/03/17 20:15:04 dhankins Exp $ +.\" $Id: dhclient-script.8,v 1.3 2009/07/23 18:52:20 sar Exp $ .\" .\" Copyright (c) 2004 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") .\" Copyright (c) 1996-2003 by Internet Software Consortium @@ -19,12 +19,12 @@ .\" 950 Charter Street .\" Redwood City, CA 94063 .\" -.\" http://www.isc.org/ +.\" https://www.isc.org/ .\" .\" This software has been written for Internet Systems Consortium .\" by Ted Lemon in cooperation with Vixie Enterprises and Nominum, Inc. .\" To learn more about Internet Systems Consortium, see -.\" ``http://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, +.\" ``https://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, .\" see ``http://www.vix.com''. To learn more about Nominum, Inc., see .\" ``http://www.nominum.com''. .\" @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ dhclient.conf(5), dhclient.leases(5), dhclient(8) Vixie Enterprises �ȶ��Ϥ�� Internet Systems Consortium �Τ�� 񤭤ޤ�� Internet Systems Consortium �ˤĤ��Ƥ��ܤ��ϡ� -.B http://www.isc.org +.B https://www.isc.org �� Vixie Enterprises �ˤĤ��Ƥ��ܤ��ϡ� .B http://www.vix.com diff --git a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.8 b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.8 index d57cd3f4..f7295fb5 100644 --- a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.8 +++ b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.8 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.\" $Id: dhclient.8,v 1.2 2005/03/17 20:15:05 dhankins Exp $ +.\" $Id: dhclient.8,v 1.3 2009/07/23 18:52:20 sar Exp $ .\" .\" Copyright (c) 2004 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") .\" Copyright (c) 1996-2003 by Internet Software Consortium @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ .\" 950 Charter Street .\" Redwood City, CA 94063 .\" -.\" http://www.isc.org/ +.\" https://www.isc.org/ .\" .\" Portions copyright (c) 2000 David E. O'Brien. .\" All rights reserved. @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ dhclient.conf(5), dhclient.leases(5), dhclient-script(8) Vixie Enterprises �ȶ��Ϥ�� Internet Systems Consortium �Τ�� 񤭤ޤ�� Internet Systems Consortium �ˤĤ��Ƥ��ܤ��ϡ� -.B http://www.isc.org +.B https://www.isc.org �� Vixie Enterprises �ˤĤ��Ƥ��ܤ��ϡ� .B http://www.vix.com diff --git a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.conf.5 b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.conf.5 index db6bfaa4..1ddcb609 100644 --- a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.conf.5 +++ b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.conf.5 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.\" $Id: dhclient.conf.5,v 1.2 2005/03/17 20:15:05 dhankins Exp $ +.\" $Id: dhclient.conf.5,v 1.3 2009/07/23 18:52:20 sar Exp $ .\" .\" Copyright (c) 2004 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") .\" Copyright (c) 1996-2003 by Internet Software Consortium @@ -19,12 +19,12 @@ .\" 950 Charter Street .\" Redwood City, CA 94063 .\" -.\" http://www.isc.org/ +.\" https://www.isc.org/ .\" .\" This software has been written for Internet Systems Consortium .\" by Ted Lemon in cooperation with Vixie Enterprises and Nominum, Inc. .\" To learn more about Internet Systems Consortium, see -.\" ``http://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, +.\" ``https://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, .\" see ``http://www.vix.com''. To learn more about Nominum, Inc., see .\" ``http://www.nominum.com''. .\" @@ -621,5 +621,5 @@ RFC2131 �� Vixie Labs �Ȥη��Τ�Ȥ� Ted Lemon ��񤭤ޤ�� ܥץ��Ȥδ�� Internet Systems Consortium ��󶡤��ޤ�� Internet Systems Consortium �˴ؤ��ϡ� -.B http://www.isc.org +.B https://www.isc.org �ˤ��ޤ�� diff --git a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.leases.5 b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.leases.5 index 48dbaebc..982c0f0f 100644 --- a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.leases.5 +++ b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhclient.leases.5 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.\" $Id: dhclient.leases.5,v 1.2 2005/03/17 20:15:05 dhankins Exp $ +.\" $Id: dhclient.leases.5,v 1.3 2009/07/23 18:52:20 sar Exp $ .\" .\" Copyright (c) 2004 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") .\" Copyright (c) 1997-2003 by Internet Software Consortium @@ -19,12 +19,12 @@ .\" 950 Charter Street .\" Redwood City, CA 94063 .\" -.\" http://www.isc.org/ +.\" https://www.isc.org/ .\" .\" This software has been written for Internet Systems Consortium .\" by Ted Lemon in cooperation with Vixie .\" Enterprises. To learn more about Internet Systems Consortium, -.\" see ``http://www.isc.org/isc''. To learn more about Vixie +.\" see ``https://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie .\" Enterprises, see ``http://www.vix.com''. .\" .\" @@ -58,5 +58,5 @@ RFC2132, RFC2131 �ϡ�Vixie Labs �Ȥη��Τ�Ȥǡ�Ted Lemon ��Ҥ��ޤ�� ܥץ��Ȥλ��ϡ�Internet Systems Consortium ��󶡤��ޤ�� Internet Systems Consortium �˴ؤ��ϡ� -.B http://www.isc.org +.B https://www.isc.org �ˤ��ޤ�� diff --git a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-eval.5 b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-eval.5 index e85dc7bc..c940ca1f 100644 --- a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-eval.5 +++ b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-eval.5 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.\" $Id: dhcp-eval.5,v 1.3 2007/01/29 10:25:55 shane Exp $ +.\" $Id: dhcp-eval.5,v 1.4 2009/07/23 18:52:20 sar Exp $ .\" .\" Copyright (c) 2004 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") .\" Copyright (c) 1996-2003 by Internet Software Consortium @@ -19,12 +19,12 @@ .\" 950 Charter Street .\" Redwood City, CA 94063 .\" -.\" http://www.isc.org/ +.\" https://www.isc.org/ .\" .\" This software has been written for Internet Systems Consortium .\" by Ted Lemon in cooperation with Vixie Enterprises and Nominum, Inc. .\" To learn more about Internet Systems Consortium, see -.\" ``http://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, +.\" ``https://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, .\" see ``http://www.vix.com''. To learn more about Nominum, Inc., see .\" ``http://www.nominum.com''. .\" $FreeBSD: doc/ja_JP.eucJP/man/man5/dhcp-eval.5,v 1.2 2002/05/23 04:17:13 horikawa Exp $ @@ -484,5 +484,5 @@ Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Distribution �ϡ�Vixie Labs �Ȥη��Τ�Ȥǡ�Ted Lemon ��Ҥ��ޤ�� ܥץ��Ȥλ��ϡ�Internet Systems Consortium ��󶡤��ޤ�� Internet Systems Consortium �˴ؤ��ϡ� -.B http://www.isc.org +.B https://www.isc.org �ˤ��ޤ�� diff --git a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-options.5 b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-options.5 index 8c5ed881..cb183724 100644 --- a/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-options.5 +++ b/doc/ja_JP.eucJP/dhcp-options.5 @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -.\" $Id: dhcp-options.5,v 1.2 2005/03/17 20:15:06 dhankins Exp $ +.\" $Id: dhcp-options.5,v 1.3 2009/07/23 18:52:20 sar Exp $ .\" .\" Copyright (c) 2004 by Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. ("ISC") .\" Copyright (c) 1996-2003 by Internet Software Consortium @@ -19,12 +19,12 @@ .\" 950 Charter Street .\" Redwood City, CA 94063 .\" -.\" http://www.isc.org/ +.\" https://www.isc.org/ .\" .\" This software has been written for Internet Systems Consortium .\" by Ted Lemon in cooperation with Vixie Enterprises and Nominum, Inc. .\" To learn more about Internet Systems Consortium, see -.\" ``http://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, +.\" ``https://www.isc.org/''. To learn more about Vixie Enterprises, .\" see ``http://www.vix.com''. To learn more about Nominum, Inc., see .\" ``http://www.nominum.com''. .\" @@ -1577,5 +1577,5 @@ Internet Systems Consortium DHCP Distribution �ϡ�Vixie Labs �Ȥη��Τ�Ȥǡ�Ted Lemon ��Ҥ��ޤ�� ܥץ��Ȥλ��ϡ�Internet Systems Consortium ��󶡤��ޤ�� Internet Systems Consortium �˴ؤ��ϡ� -.B http://www.isc.org +.B https://www.isc.org �ˤ��ޤ�� -- cgit v1.2.1