DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions
RFC 1533
Document | Type |
RFC
- Proposed Standard
(October 1993)
Obsoleted by RFC 2132
Was
draft-ietf-dhc-options
(dhc WG)
|
|
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Steve Alexander , Ralph Droms | ||
Last updated | 2020-07-29 | ||
RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
Formats | |||
Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
IESG | Responsible AD | (None) | |
Send notices to | (None) |
RFC 1533
quot; fields are being overloaded by using them to carry DHCP options. A DHCP server inserts this option if the returned parameters will exceed the usual space allotted for options. If this option is present, the client interprets the specified additional fields after it concludes interpretation of the standard option fields. The code for this option is 52, and its length is 1. Legal values for this option are: Alexander & Droms [Page 23] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 Value Meaning ----- -------- 1 the "file" field is used to hold options 2 the "sname" field is used to hold options 3 both fields are used to hold options Code Len Value +-----+-----+-----+ | 52 | 1 |1/2/3| +-----+-----+-----+ 9.4. DHCP Message Type This option is used to convey the type of the DHCP message. The code for this option is 53, and its length is 1. Legal values for this option are: Value Message Type ----- ------------ 1 DHCPDISCOVER 2 DHCPOFFER 3 DHCPREQUEST 4 DHCPDECLINE 5 DHCPACK 6 DHCPNAK 7 DHCPRELEASE Code Len Type +-----+-----+-----+ | 53 | 1 | 1-7 | +-----+-----+-----+ 9.5. Server Identifier This option is used in DHCPOFFER and DHCPREQUEST messages, and may optionally be included in the DHCPACK and DHCPNAK messages. DHCP servers include this option in the DHCPOFFER in order to allow the client to distinguish between lease offers. DHCP clients indicate which of several lease offers is being accepted by including this option in a DHCPREQUEST message. The identifier is the IP address of the selected server. Alexander & Droms [Page 24] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 The code for this option is 54, and its length is 4. Code Len Address +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ | 54 | 4 | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ 9.6. Parameter Request List This option is used by a DHCP client to request values for specified configuration parameters. The list of requested parameters is specified as n octets, where each octet is a valid DHCP option code as defined in this document. The client MAY list the options in order of preference. The DHCP server is not required to return the options in the requested order, but MUST try to insert the requested options in the order requested by the client. The code for this option is 55. Its minimum length is 1. Code Len Option Codes +-----+-----+-----+-----+--- | 55 | n | c1 | c2 | ... +-----+-----+-----+-----+--- 9.7. Message This option is used by a DHCP server to provide an error message to a DHCP client in a DHCPNAK message in the event of a failure. A client may use this option in a DHCPDECLINE message to indicate the why the client declined the offered parameters. The message consists of n octets of NVT ASCII text, which the client may display on an available output device. The code for this option is 56 and its minimum length is 1. Code Len Text +-----+-----+-----+-----+--- | 56 | n | c1 | c2 | ... +-----+-----+-----+-----+--- Alexander & Droms [Page 25] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 9.8. Maximum DHCP Message Size This option specifies the maximum length DHCP message that it is willing to accept. The length is specified as an unsigned 16-bit integer. A client may use the maximum DHCP message size option in DHCPDISCOVER or DHCPREQUEST messages, but should not use the option in DHCPDECLINE messages. The code for this option is 57, and its length is 2. The minimum legal value is 576 octets. Code Len Length +-----+-----+-----+-----+ | 57 | 2 | l1 | l2 | +-----+-----+-----+-----+ 9.9. Renewal (T1) Time Value This option specifies the time interval from address assignment until the client transitions to the RENEWING state. The value is in units of seconds, and is specified as a 32-bit unsigned integer. The code for this option is 58, and its length is 4. Code Len T1 Interval +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ | 58 | 4 | t1 | t2 | t3 | t4 | +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ 9.10. Rebinding (T2) Time Value This option specifies the time interval from address assignment until the client transitions to the REBINDING state. The value is in units of seconds, and is specified as a 32-bit unsigned integer. The code for this option is 59, and its length is 4. Code Len T2 Interval +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ | 59 | 4 | t1 | t2 | t3 | t4 | +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Alexander & Droms [Page 26] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 9.11. Class-identifier This option is used by DHCP clients to optionally identify the type and configuration of a DHCP client. The information is a string of n octets, interpreted by servers. Vendors and sites may choose to define specific class identifiers to convey particular configuration or other identification information about a client. For example, the identifier may encode the client's hardware configuration. Servers not equipped to interpret the class-specific information sent by a client MUST ignore it (although it may be reported). The code for this option is 60, and its minimum length is 1. Code Len Class-Identifier +-----+-----+-----+-----+--- | 60 | n | i1 | i2 | ... +-----+-----+-----+-----+--- 9.12. Client-identifier This option is used by DHCP clients to specify their unique identifier. DHCP servers use this value to index their database of address bindings. This value is expected to be unique for all clients in an administrative domain. Identifiers consist of a type-value pair, similar to the It is expected that this field will typically contain a hardware type and hardware address, but this is not required. Current legal values for hardware types are defined in [22]. The code for this option is 61, and its minimum length is 2. Code Len Type Client-Identifier +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+--- | 61 | n | t1 | i1 | i2 | ... +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+--- 10. Extensions Additional generic data fields may be registered by contacting: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) USC/Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, California 90292-6695 or by email as: iana@isi.edu Alexander & Droms [Page 27] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 Implementation specific use of undefined generic types (those in the range 61-127) may conflict with other implementations, and registration is required. 11. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Philip Almquist for his feedback on this document. The comments of the DHCP Working Group are also gratefully acknowledged. In particular, Mike Carney and Jon Dreyer from SunSelect suggested the current format of the Vendor-specific Information option. RFC 1497 is based on earlier work by Philip Prindeville, with help from Drew Perkins, Bill Croft, and Steve Deering. 12. References [1] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 1531, Bucknell University, October 1993. [2] Reynolds, J., "BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions", RFC 1497, USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1993. [3] Croft, W., and J. Gilmore, "Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 951, Stanford University and Sun Microsystems, September 1985. [4] Braden, R., Editor, "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, USC/Information Sciences Institute, October 1989. [5] Mogul, J., and J. Postel, "Internet Standard Subnetting Procedure", STD 5, RFC 950, USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1985. [6] Postel, J., and K. Harrenstien, "Time Protocol", STD 26, RFC 868, USC/Information Sciences Institute, SRI, May 1983. [7] Postel, J., "Name Server", IEN 116, USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1979. [8] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and Specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, USC/Information Sciences Institute, November 1987. [9] Postel, J., "Quote of the Day Protocol", STD 23, RFC 865, USC/Information Sciences Institute, May 1983. Alexander & Droms [Page 28] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 [10] McLaughlin, L., "Line Printer Daemon Protocol", RFC 1179, The Wollongong Group, August 1990. [11] Accetta, M., "Resource Location Protocol", RFC 887, CMU, December 1983. [12] Mogul, J. and S. Deering, "Path MTU Discovery", RFC 1191, DECWRL, Stanford University, November 1990. [13] Deering, S., "ICMP Router Discovery Messages", RFC 1256, Xerox PARC, September 1991. [14] Leffler, S. and M. Karels, "Trailer Encapsulations", RFC 893, U. C. Berkeley, April 1984. [15] Hornig, C., "Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams over Ethernet Networks", RFC 894, Symbolics, April 1984. [16] Postel, J. and J. Reynolds, "Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams Over IEEE 802 Networks", RFC 1042, USC/Information Sciences Institute, February 1988. [17] Sun Microsystems, "System and Network Administration", March 1990. [18] Mills, D., "Internet Time Synchronization: The Network Time Protocol", RFC 1305, UDEL, March 1992. [19] NetBIOS Working Group, "Protocol Standard for a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Concepts and Methods", STD 19, RFC 1001, March 1987. [20] NetBIOS Working Group, "Protocol Standard for a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP transport: Detailed Specifications", STD 19, RFC 1002, March 1987. [21] Scheifler, R., "FYI On the X Window System", FYI 6, RFC 1198, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, January 1991. [22] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, RFC 1340, USC/Information Sciences Institute, July 1992. 13. Security Considerations Security issues are not discussed in this memo. Alexander & Droms [Page 29] RFC 1533 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions October 1993 14. Authors' Addresses Steve Alexander Lachman Technology, Inc. 1901 North Naper Boulevard Naperville, IL 60563-8895 Phone: (708) 505-9555 x256 EMail: stevea@lachman.com Ralph Droms Computer Science Department 323 Dana Engineering Bucknell University Lewisburg, PA 17837 Phone: (717) 524-1145 EMail: droms@bucknell.edu Alexander & Droms [Page 30]