Re: [Etherboot-developers] DHCP option 175

[Michael B. <mb...@fe...>]

On Wed, 22 May 2002, Ken Yap wrote:
> >> Also I'd prefer that this tag be encapsulated inside one of the standard
> >> tags for this sort of client info, perhaps even the
> >> vendor-class-identifier tag to avoid using 175.
> >It could be wrapped up in vendor-encapsulated-options.  I chose 175 in
> >order to fit in with the current scheme which, AFAICT, uses the site-local
> >DHCP options (128-254) instead of encapsulation.
> True, but those were the bad old days.

:o)

OK, how about this:

Etherboot will accept options either "raw" (site-local) or encapsulated in
vendor-encapsulated-options, using the same option codes for both cases.

Etherboot will send PCI ID inside vendor-encapsulated-options.



DHCP servers configured to work without encapsulation will continue to
work with new Etherboot code (since Etherboot will accept both raw and
encapsulated options).

DHCP servers will know that if the Etherboot request includes a
vendor-encapsulated-options option then they can reply using encapsulated
options.  Otherwise, they should return the raw options in order to
maintain backwards compatibility with older BootROMs.


I'll knock something up to implement this unless there are more objections
:-)

Michael