DHCP
DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol)
Within this page
DHCP subjects:
- DHCPv674 RFCs
DHCP RFCs (94)
RFC 9463: DHCP and Router Advertisement Options for the Discovery of Network-designated Resolvers (DNR)
Proposed Standard- M. Boucadair
- T. Reddy.K
- D. Wing
- N. Cook
- T. Jensen
- November 2023
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies new DHCP and IPv6 Router Advertisement options to discover encrypted DNS resolvers (e.g., DNS over HTTPS, DNS over TLS, and DNS over QUIC). Particularly, it allows a host to learn an Authentication Domain Name together with a list of IP addresses and a set of service parameters to reach such encrypted DNS resolvers.
Abstract
This document specifies new DHCP and IPv6 Router Advertisement options to discover encrypted DNS resolvers (e.g., DNS over HTTPS, DNS over TLS, and DNS over QUIC). Particularly, it allows a host to learn an Authentication Domain Name together with a list of IP addresses and a set of service parameters to reach such encrypted DNS resolvers.
RFC 9445: RADIUS Extensions for DHCP-Configured Services
Proposed Standard- M. Boucadair
- T. Reddy.K
- A. DeKok
- August 2023
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
This document specifies two new Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) attributes that carry DHCP options. The specification is generic and can be applicable to any service that relies upon DHCP. Both DHCPv4- and DHCPv6-configured services are covered.
Also, this document updates RFC 4014 by relaxing a constraint on permitted RADIUS attributes in the RADIUS Attributes DHCP suboption.
Abstract
This document specifies two new Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) attributes that carry DHCP options. The specification is generic and can be applicable to any service that relies upon DHCP. Both DHCPv4- and DHCPv6-configured services are covered.
Also, this document updates RFC 4014 by relaxing a constraint on permitted RADIUS attributes in the RADIUS Attributes DHCP suboption.
RFC 8925: IPv6-Only Preferred Option for DHCPv4
Proposed Standard- L. Colitti
- J. Linkova
- M. Richardson
- T. Mrugalski
- October 2020
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies a DHCPv4 option to indicate that a host supports an IPv6-only mode and is willing to forgo obtaining an IPv4 address if the network provides IPv6 connectivity. It also updates RFC 2563 to specify DHCPv4 server behavior when the server receives a DHCPDISCOVER not containing the Auto-Configure option but containing the new option defined in this document.
Abstract
This document specifies a DHCPv4 option to indicate that a host supports an IPv6-only mode and is willing to forgo obtaining an IPv4 address if the network provides IPv6 connectivity. It also updates RFC 2563 to specify DHCPv4 server behavior when the server receives a DHCPDISCOVER not containing the Auto-Configure option but containing the new option defined in this document.
RFC 8910: Captive-Portal Identification in DHCP and Router Advertisements (RAs)
Proposed Standard- W. Kumari
- E. Kline
- September 2020
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
In many environments offering short-term or temporary Internet access (such as coffee shops), it is common to start new connections in a captive portal mode. This highly restricts what the user can do until the user has satisfied the captive portal conditions.
This document describes a DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 option and a Router Advertisement (RA) option to inform clients that they are behind some sort of captive portal enforcement device, and that they will need to satisfy the Captive Portal conditions to get Internet access. It is not a full solution to address all of the issues that clients may have with captive portals; it is designed to be one component of a standardized approach for hosts to interact with such portals. While this document defines how the network operator may convey the captive portal API endpoint to hosts, the specific methods of satisfying and interacting with the captive portal are out of scope of this document.
This document replaces RFC 7710, which used DHCP code point 160. Due to a conflict, this document specifies 114. Consequently, this document also updates RFC 3679.
Abstract
In many environments offering short-term or temporary Internet access (such as coffee shops), it is common to start new connections in a captive portal mode. This highly restricts what the user can do until the user has satisfied the captive portal conditions.
This document describes a DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 option and a Router Advertisement (RA) option to inform clients that they are behind some sort of captive portal enforcement device, and that they will need to satisfy the Captive Portal conditions to get Internet access. It is not a full solution to address all of the issues that clients may have with captive portals; it is designed to be one component of a standardized approach for hosts to interact with such portals. While this document defines how the network operator may convey the captive portal API endpoint to hosts, the specific methods of satisfying and interacting with the captive portal are out of scope of this document.
This document replaces RFC 7710, which used DHCP code point 160. Due to a conflict, this document specifies 114. Consequently, this document also updates RFC 3679.
RFC 8801: Discovering Provisioning Domain Names and Data
Proposed Standard- P. Pfister
- É. Vyncke
- T. Pauly
- D. Schinazi
- W. Shao
- July 2020
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Provisioning Domains (PvDs) are defined as consistent sets of network configuration information. PvDs allows hosts to manage connections to multiple networks and interfaces simultaneously, such as when a home router provides connectivity through both a broadband and cellular network provider.
This document defines a mechanism for explicitly identifying PvDs through a Router Advertisement (RA) option. This RA option announces a PvD identifier, which hosts can compare to differentiate between PvDs. The option can directly carry some information about a PvD and can optionally point to PvD Additional Information that can be retrieved using HTTP over TLS.
Abstract
Provisioning Domains (PvDs) are defined as consistent sets of network configuration information. PvDs allows hosts to manage connections to multiple networks and interfaces simultaneously, such as when a home router provides connectivity through both a broadband and cellular network provider.
This document defines a mechanism for explicitly identifying PvDs through a Router Advertisement (RA) option. This RA option announces a PvD identifier, which hosts can compare to differentiate between PvDs. The option can directly carry some information about a PvD and can optionally point to PvD Additional Information that can be retrieved using HTTP over TLS.
RFC 8357: Generalized UDP Source Port for DHCP Relay
Proposed Standard- N. Shen
- E. Chen
- March 2018
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the DHCP protocols that allows a relay agent to use any available source port for upstream communications. The extension also allows inclusion of a DHCP option that can be used to statelessly route responses back to the appropriate source port on downstream communications.
Abstract
This document defines an extension to the DHCP protocols that allows a relay agent to use any available source port for upstream communications. The extension also allows inclusion of a DHCP option that can be used to statelessly route responses back to the appropriate source port on downstream communications.
RFC 8302: Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL): ARP and Neighbor Discovery (ND) Optimization
Proposed Standard- Y. Li
- D. Eastlake 3rd
- L. Dunbar
- R. Perlman
- M. Umair
- January 2018
- IETF publication
- Routing Area
Abstract
This document describes mechanisms to optimize the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) and Neighbor Discovery (ND) traffic in a Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL) campus. TRILL switches maintain a cache of IP / Media Access Control (MAC) address / Data Label bindings that are learned from ARP/ND requests and responses that pass through them. In many cases, this cache allows an edge Routing Bridge (RBridge) to avoid flooding an ARP/ND request by either responding to it directly or encapsulating it and unicasting it. Such optimization reduces packet flooding over a TRILL campus.
Abstract
This document describes mechanisms to optimize the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) and Neighbor Discovery (ND) traffic in a Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL) campus. TRILL switches maintain a cache of IP / Media Access Control (MAC) address / Data Label bindings that are learned from ARP/ND requests and responses that pass through them. In many cases, this cache allows an edge Routing Bridge (RBridge) to avoid flooding an ARP/ND request by either responding to it directly or encapsulating it and unicasting it. Such optimization reduces packet flooding over a TRILL campus.
RFC 8213: Security of Messages Exchanged between Servers and Relay Agents
Proposed Standard- B. Volz
- Y. Pal
- August 2017
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) has no guidance for how to secure messages exchanged between servers and relay agents. The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) states that IPsec should be used to secure messages exchanged between servers and relay agents but does not require encryption. With recent concerns about pervasive monitoring and other attacks, it is appropriate to require securing relay-to-relay and relay-to-server communication for DHCPv6 and relay-to-server communication for DHCPv4.
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) has no guidance for how to secure messages exchanged between servers and relay agents. The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) states that IPsec should be used to secure messages exchanged between servers and relay agents but does not require encryption. With recent concerns about pervasive monitoring and other attacks, it is appropriate to require securing relay-to-relay and relay-to-server communication for DHCPv6 and relay-to-server communication for DHCPv4.
RFC 8074: Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) for Mixed Address Assignment Methods Scenario
Proposed Standard- J. Bi
- G. Yao
- J. Halpern
- E. Levy-Abegnoli
- February 2017
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
In networks that use multiple techniques for address assignment, the spoofing of addresses assigned by each technique can be prevented using the appropriate Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) methods. This document reviews how multiple SAVI methods can coexist in a single SAVI device and how collisions are resolved when the same binding entry is discovered by two or more methods.
Abstract
In networks that use multiple techniques for address assignment, the spoofing of addresses assigned by each technique can be prevented using the appropriate Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) methods. This document reviews how multiple SAVI methods can coexist in a single SAVI device and how collisions are resolved when the same binding entry is discovered by two or more methods.
RFC 7819: Privacy Considerations for DHCP
Informational- S. Jiang
- S. Krishnan
- T. Mrugalski
- April 2016
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
DHCP is a protocol that is used to provide addressing and configuration information to IPv4 hosts. This document discusses the various identifiers used by DHCP and the potential privacy issues.
Abstract
DHCP is a protocol that is used to provide addressing and configuration information to IPv4 hosts. This document discusses the various identifiers used by DHCP and the potential privacy issues.
RFC 7724: Active DHCPv4 Lease Query
Proposed Standard- K. Kinnear
- M. Stapp
- B. Volz
- N. Russell
- December 2015
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) has been extended with a Leasequery capability that allows a requestor to request information about DHCPv4 bindings (RFC 4388). That mechanism is limited to queries for individual bindings. In some situations, individual binding queries may not be efficient, or even possible. In addition, continuous update of an external requestor with Leasequery data is sometimes desired. This document expands on the DHCPv4 Leasequery protocol, and allows for active transfer of near real-time DHCPv4 binding information data via TCP. This document updates RFC 6926, "DHCPv4 Bulk Leasequery".
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) has been extended with a Leasequery capability that allows a requestor to request information about DHCPv4 bindings (RFC 4388). That mechanism is limited to queries for individual bindings. In some situations, individual binding queries may not be efficient, or even possible. In addition, continuous update of an external requestor with Leasequery data is sometimes desired. This document expands on the DHCPv4 Leasequery protocol, and allows for active transfer of near real-time DHCPv4 binding information data via TCP. This document updates RFC 6926, "DHCPv4 Bulk Leasequery".
RFC 7710: Captive-Portal Identification Using DHCP or Router Advertisements (RAs)
Proposed Standard- W. Kumari
- O. Gudmundsson
- P. Ebersman
- S. Sheng
- December 2015
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
In many environments offering short-term or temporary Internet access (such as coffee shops), it is common to start new connections in a captive-portal mode. This highly restricts what the customer can do until the customer has authenticated.
This document describes a DHCP option (and a Router Advertisement (RA) extension) to inform clients that they are behind some sort of captive-portal device and that they will need to authenticate to get Internet access. It is not a full solution to address all of the issues that clients may have with captive portals; it is designed to be used in larger solutions. The method of authenticating to and interacting with the captive portal is out of scope for this document.
Obsoleted by RFC 8910
Abstract
In many environments offering short-term or temporary Internet access (such as coffee shops), it is common to start new connections in a captive-portal mode. This highly restricts what the customer can do until the customer has authenticated.
This document describes a DHCP option (and a Router Advertisement (RA) extension) to inform clients that they are behind some sort of captive-portal device and that they will need to authenticate to get Internet access. It is not a full solution to address all of the issues that clients may have with captive portals; it is designed to be used in larger solutions. The method of authenticating to and interacting with the captive portal is out of scope for this document.
RFC 7618: Dynamic Allocation of Shared IPv4 Addresses
Proposed Standard- Y. Cui
- Q. Sun
- I. Farrer
- Y. Lee
- Q. Sun
- M. Boucadair
- August 2015
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo describes the dynamic allocation of shared IPv4 addresses to clients using DHCPv4. Address sharing allows a single IPv4 address to be allocated to multiple active clients simultaneously, with each client being differentiated by a unique set of transport- layer source port numbers. The necessary changes to existing DHCPv4 client and server behavior are described, and a new DHCPv4 option for provisioning clients with shared IPv4 addresses is included.
Due to the nature of IP address sharing, some limitations to its applicability are necessary. This memo describes these limitations and recommends suitable architectures and technologies where address sharing may be utilized.
Abstract
This memo describes the dynamic allocation of shared IPv4 addresses to clients using DHCPv4. Address sharing allows a single IPv4 address to be allocated to multiple active clients simultaneously, with each client being differentiated by a unique set of transport- layer source port numbers. The necessary changes to existing DHCPv4 client and server behavior are described, and a new DHCPv4 option for provisioning clients with shared IPv4 addresses is included.
Due to the nature of IP address sharing, some limitations to its applicability are necessary. This memo describes these limitations and recommends suitable architectures and technologies where address sharing may be utilized.
RFC 7513: Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) Solution for DHCP
Proposed Standard- J. Bi
- J. Wu
- G. Yao
- F. Baker
- May 2015
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies the procedure for creating a binding between a DHCPv4/DHCPv6-assigned IP address and a binding anchor on a Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) device. The bindings set up by this procedure are used to filter packets with forged source IP addresses. This mechanism complements BCP 38 (RFC 2827) ingress filtering, providing finer-grained source IP address validation.
Abstract
This document specifies the procedure for creating a binding between a DHCPv4/DHCPv6-assigned IP address and a binding anchor on a Source Address Validation Improvement (SAVI) device. The bindings set up by this procedure are used to filter packets with forged source IP addresses. This mechanism complements BCP 38 (RFC 2827) ingress filtering, providing finer-grained source IP address validation.
RFC 7291: DHCP Options for the Port Control Protocol (PCP)
Proposed Standard- M. Boucadair
- R. Penno
- D. Wing
- July 2014
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies DHCP (IPv4 and IPv6) options to configure hosts with Port Control Protocol (PCP) server IP addresses. The use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenarios. The set of deployment scenarios to which DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 can be applied is outside the scope of this document.
Abstract
This document specifies DHCP (IPv4 and IPv6) options to configure hosts with Port Control Protocol (PCP) server IP addresses. The use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenarios. The set of deployment scenarios to which DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 can be applied is outside the scope of this document.
RFC 7083: Modification to Default Values of SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- November 2013
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 3315 by redefining the default values for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT and defining options through which a DHCPv6 server can override the client's default value for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT with new values.
Obsoleted by RFC 8415
Abstract
This document updates RFC 3315 by redefining the default values for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT and defining options through which a DHCPv6 server can override the client's default value for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT with new values.
RFC 6925: The DHCPv4 Relay Agent Identifier Sub-Option
Proposed Standard- B. Joshi
- R. Desetti
- M. Stapp
- April 2013
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new Relay Agent Identifier sub-option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Information option. The sub-option carries a value that uniquely identifies the relay agent device within the administrative domain. The value is normally administratively configured in the relay agent. The sub-option allows a DHCP relay agent to include the identifier in the DHCP messages it sends.
Abstract
This document defines a new Relay Agent Identifier sub-option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Information option. The sub-option carries a value that uniquely identifies the relay agent device within the administrative domain. The value is normally administratively configured in the relay agent. The sub-option allows a DHCP relay agent to include the identifier in the DHCP messages it sends.
RFC 6926: DHCPv4 Bulk Leasequery
Proposed Standard- K. Kinnear
- M. Stapp
- R. Desetti
- B. Joshi
- N. Russell
- P. Kurapati
- B. Volz
- April 2013
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) Leasequery protocol allows a requestor to request information about DHCPv4 bindings. This protocol is limited to queries for individual bindings. In some situations, individual binding queries may not be efficient or even possible. This document extends the DHCPv4 Leasequery protocol to allow for bulk transfer of DHCPv4 address binding data via TCP.
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) Leasequery protocol allows a requestor to request information about DHCPv4 bindings. This protocol is limited to queries for individual bindings. In some situations, individual binding queries may not be efficient or even possible. This document extends the DHCPv4 Leasequery protocol to allow for bulk transfer of DHCPv4 address binding data via TCP.
RFC 6842: Client Identifier Option in DHCP Server Replies
Proposed Standard- N. Swamy
- G. Halwasia
- P. Jhingran
- January 2013
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 2131 "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol" by addressing the issues arising from that document's specification that the server MUST NOT return the 'client identifier' option to the client. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document updates RFC 2131 "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol" by addressing the issues arising from that document's specification that the server MUST NOT return the 'client identifier' option to the client. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6704: Forcerenew Nonce Authentication
Proposed Standard- D. Miles
- W. Dec
- J. Bristow
- R. Maglione
- August 2012
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) FORCERENEW allows for the reconfiguration of a single host by forcing the DHCP client into a Renew state on a trigger from the DHCP server. In the Forcerenew Nonce Authentication protocol, the server sends a nonce to the client in the initial DHCP ACK that is used for subsequent validation of a FORCERENEW message. This document updates RFC 3203. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) FORCERENEW allows for the reconfiguration of a single host by forcing the DHCP client into a Renew state on a trigger from the DHCP server. In the Forcerenew Nonce Authentication protocol, the server sends a nonce to the client in the initial DHCP ACK that is used for subsequent validation of a FORCERENEW message. This document updates RFC 3203. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6656: Description of Cisco Systems' Subnet Allocation Option for DHCPv4
Informational- R. Johnson
- K. Kinnear
- M. Stapp
- July 2012
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo documents a DHCPv4 option that currently exists and was previously privately defined for the operation and usage of the Cisco Systems' Subnet Allocation Option for DHCPv4. The option is passed between the DHCPv4 Client and the DHCPv4 Server to request dynamic allocation of a subnet, give specifications of the subnet(s) allocated, and report usage statistics. This memo documents the current usage of the option in agreement with RFC 3942, which declares that any preexisting usages of option numbers in the range 128-223 should be documented and that the working group will try to officially assign those numbers to those options. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This memo documents a DHCPv4 option that currently exists and was previously privately defined for the operation and usage of the Cisco Systems' Subnet Allocation Option for DHCPv4. The option is passed between the DHCPv4 Client and the DHCPv4 Server to request dynamic allocation of a subnet, give specifications of the subnet(s) allocated, and report usage statistics. This memo documents the current usage of the option in agreement with RFC 3942, which declares that any preexisting usages of option numbers in the range 128-223 should be documented and that the working group will try to officially assign those numbers to those options. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6610: DHCP Options for Home Information Discovery in Mobile IPv6 (MIPv6)
Proposed Standard- H. Jang
- A. Yegin
- K. Chowdhury
- J. Choi
- T. Lemon
- May 2012
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP-based scheme to enable dynamic discovery of Mobile IPv6 home network information. New DHCP options are defined that allow a mobile node to request the home agent IP address, Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN), or home network prefix and obtain it via the DHCP response. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP-based scheme to enable dynamic discovery of Mobile IPv6 home network information. New DHCP options are defined that allow a mobile node to request the home agent IP address, Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN), or home network prefix and obtain it via the DHCP response. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6418: Multiple Interfaces and Provisioning Domains Problem Statement
Informational- M. Blanchet
- P. Seite
- November 2011
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes issues encountered by a node attached to multiple provisioning domains. This node receives configuration information from each of its provisioning domains, where some configuration objects are global to the node and others are local to the interface. Issues such as selecting the wrong interface to send traffic happen when conflicting node-scoped configuration objects are received and inappropriately used. Moreover, other issues are the result of simultaneous attachment to multiple networks, such as domain selection or addressing and naming space overlaps, regardless of the provisioning mechanism. While multiple provisioning domains are typically seen on nodes with multiple interfaces, this document also discusses situations involving single-interface nodes. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Abstract
This document describes issues encountered by a node attached to multiple provisioning domains. This node receives configuration information from each of its provisioning domains, where some configuration objects are global to the node and others are local to the interface. Issues such as selecting the wrong interface to send traffic happen when conflicting node-scoped configuration objects are received and inappropriately used. Moreover, other issues are the result of simultaneous attachment to multiple networks, such as domain selection or addressing and naming space overlaps, regardless of the provisioning mechanism. While multiple provisioning domains are typically seen on nodes with multiple interfaces, this document also discusses situations involving single-interface nodes. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
RFC 6225: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Options for Coordinate-Based Location Configuration Information
Proposed Standard- J. Polk
- M. Linsner
- M. Thomson
- B. Aboba
- July 2011
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol options (both DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) for the coordinate-based geographic location of the client. The Location Configuration Information (LCI) includes Latitude, Longitude, and Altitude, with resolution or uncertainty indicators for each. Separate parameters indicate the reference datum for each of these values. This document obsoletes RFC 3825. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol options (both DHCPv4 and DHCPv6) for the coordinate-based geographic location of the client. The Location Configuration Information (LCI) includes Latitude, Longitude, and Altitude, with resolution or uncertainty indicators for each. Separate parameters indicate the reference datum for each of these values. This document obsoletes RFC 3825. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 6148: DHCPv4 Lease Query by Relay Agent Remote ID
Proposed Standard- P. Kurapati
- R. Desetti
- B. Joshi
- February 2011
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Some relay agents extract lease information from the DHCP messages exchanged between the client and DHCP server. This lease information is used by relay agents for various purposes like antispoofing and prevention of flooding. RFC 4388 defines a mechanism for relay agents to retrieve the lease information from the DHCP server when this information is lost. The existing lease query mechanism is data-driven, which means that a relay agent can initiate the lease query only when it starts receiving data to and from the clients. In certain scenarios, this model is not scalable. This document first looks at issues in the existing mechanism and then proposes a new query type, query by Remote ID, to address these issues. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Some relay agents extract lease information from the DHCP messages exchanged between the client and DHCP server. This lease information is used by relay agents for various purposes like antispoofing and prevention of flooding. RFC 4388 defines a mechanism for relay agents to retrieve the lease information from the DHCP server when this information is lost. The existing lease query mechanism is data-driven, which means that a relay agent can initiate the lease query only when it starts receiving data to and from the clients. In certain scenarios, this model is not scalable. This document first looks at issues in the existing mechanism and then proposes a new query type, query by Remote ID, to address these issues. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5505: Principles of Internet Host Configuration
Informational- B. Aboba
- D. Thaler
- L. Andersson
- S. Cheshire
- May 2009
- IAB publication
Abstract
This document describes principles of Internet host configuration. It covers issues relating to configuration of Internet-layer parameters, as well as parameters affecting higher-layer protocols. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes principles of Internet host configuration. It covers issues relating to configuration of Internet-layer parameters, as well as parameters affecting higher-layer protocols. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5417: Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points (CAPWAP) Access Controller DHCP Option
Proposed Standard- P. Calhoun
- March 2009
- IETF publication
- Operations and Management Area
Abstract
The Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points Protocol allows a Wireless Termination Point to use DHCP to discover the Access Controllers to which it is to connect. This document describes the DHCP options to be used by the CAPWAP Protocol. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Control And Provisioning of Wireless Access Points Protocol allows a Wireless Termination Point to use DHCP to discover the Access Controllers to which it is to connect. This document describes the DHCP options to be used by the CAPWAP Protocol. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5223: Discovering Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Servers Using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP)
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- J. Polk
- H. Tschofenig
- August 2008
- IETF publication
- Applications and Real-Time Area
Abstract
The Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol describes an XML- based protocol for mapping service identifiers and geospatial or civic location information to service contact Uniform Resource Locators (URLs). LoST servers can be located anywhere, but a placement closer to the end host, e.g., in the access network, is desirable. In disaster situations with intermittent network connectivity, such a LoST server placement provides benefits regarding the resiliency of emergency service communication.
This document describes how a LoST client can discover a LoST server using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Location-to-Service Translation (LoST) Protocol describes an XML- based protocol for mapping service identifiers and geospatial or civic location information to service contact Uniform Resource Locators (URLs). LoST servers can be located anywhere, but a placement closer to the end host, e.g., in the access network, is desirable. In disaster situations with intermittent network connectivity, such a LoST server placement provides benefits regarding the resiliency of emergency service communication.
This document describes how a LoST client can discover a LoST server using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5192: DHCP Options for Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA) Authentication Agents
Proposed Standard- L. Morand
- A. Yegin
- S. Kumar
- S. Madanapalli
- May 2008
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines new DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 options that contain a list of IP addresses to locate one or more PANA (Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access) Authentication Agents (PAAs). This is one of the methods that a PANA Client (PaC) can use to locate PAAs. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines new DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 options that contain a list of IP addresses to locate one or more PANA (Protocol for carrying Authentication for Network Access) Authentication Agents (PAAs). This is one of the methods that a PANA Client (PaC) can use to locate PAAs. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5107: DHCP Server Identifier Override Suboption
Proposed Standard- R. Johnson
- J. Kumarasamy
- K. Kinnear
- M. Stapp
- February 2008
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo defines a new suboption of the DHCP relay information option that allows the DHCP relay to specify a new value for the Server Identifier option, which is inserted by the DHCP Server. This allows the DHCP relay to act as the actual DHCP server such that RENEW DHCPREQUESTs will come to the relay instead of going to the server directly. This gives the relay the opportunity to include the Relay Agent option with appropriate suboptions even on DHCP RENEW messages. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a new suboption of the DHCP relay information option that allows the DHCP relay to specify a new value for the Server Identifier option, which is inserted by the DHCP Server. This allows the DHCP relay to act as the actual DHCP server such that RENEW DHCPREQUESTs will come to the relay instead of going to the server directly. This gives the relay the opportunity to include the Relay Agent option with appropriate suboptions even on DHCP RENEW messages. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 5071: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Options Used by PXELINUX
Informational- D. Hankins
- December 2007
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes the use by PXELINUX of some DHCP Option Codes numbering from 208-211. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes the use by PXELINUX of some DHCP Option Codes numbering from 208-211. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 5010: The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Version 4 (DHCPv4) Relay Agent Flags Suboption
Proposed Standard- K. Kinnear
- M. Normoyle
- M. Stapp
- September 2007
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo defines a new suboption of the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) relay agent information option that allows the DHCP relay to specify flags for the forwarded packet. One flag is defined to indicate whether the DHCP relay received the packet via a unicast or broadcast packet. This information may be used by the DHCP server to better serve clients based on whether their request was originally broadcast or unicast. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a new suboption of the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) relay agent information option that allows the DHCP relay to specify flags for the forwarded packet. One flag is defined to indicate whether the DHCP relay received the packet via a unicast or broadcast packet. This information may be used by the DHCP server to better serve clients based on whether their request was originally broadcast or unicast. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4833: Timezone Options for DHCP
Proposed Standard- E. Lear
- P. Eggert
- April 2007
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Two common ways to communicate timezone information are POSIX 1003.1 timezone strings and timezone database names. This memo specifies DHCP options for each of those methods. The DHCPv4 time offset option is deprecated. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Two common ways to communicate timezone information are POSIX 1003.1 timezone strings and timezone database names. This memo specifies DHCP options for each of those methods. The DHCPv4 time offset option is deprecated. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4578: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for the Intel Preboot eXecution Environment (PXE)
Informational- M. Johnston
- S. Venaas
- November 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
We define Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options being used by Preboot eXecution Environment (PXE) and Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) clients to uniquely identify booting client machines and their pre-OS runtime environment so that the DHCP and/or PXE boot server can return the correct OS bootstrap image (or pre-boot application) name and server to the client. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
We define Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options being used by Preboot eXecution Environment (PXE) and Extensible Firmware Interface (EFI) clients to uniquely identify booting client machines and their pre-OS runtime environment so that the DHCP and/or PXE boot server can return the correct OS bootstrap image (or pre-boot application) name and server to the client. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4701: A DNS Resource Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR)
Proposed Standard- M. Stapp
- T. Lemon
- A. Gustafsson
- October 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
It is possible for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) clients to attempt to update the same DNS Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) or to update a DNS FQDN that has been added to the DNS for another purpose as they obtain DHCP leases. Whether the DHCP server or the clients themselves perform the DNS updates, conflicts can arise. To resolve such conflicts, RFC 4703 proposes storing client identifiers in the DNS to unambiguously associate domain names with the DHCP clients to which they refer. This memo defines a distinct Resource Record (RR) type for this purpose for use by DHCP clients and servers: the "DHCID" RR. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
It is possible for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) clients to attempt to update the same DNS Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) or to update a DNS FQDN that has been added to the DNS for another purpose as they obtain DHCP leases. Whether the DHCP server or the clients themselves perform the DNS updates, conflicts can arise. To resolve such conflicts, RFC 4703 proposes storing client identifiers in the DNS to unambiguously associate domain names with the DHCP clients to which they refer. This memo defines a distinct Resource Record (RR) type for this purpose for use by DHCP clients and servers: the "DHCID" RR. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4702: The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Client Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Option
Proposed Standard- M. Stapp
- B. Volz
- Y. Rekhter
- October 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) option that can be used to exchange information about a DHCPv4 client's fully qualified domain name and about responsibility for updating the DNS RR related to the client's address assignment. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4) option that can be used to exchange information about a DHCPv4 client's fully qualified domain name and about responsibility for updating the DNS RR related to the client's address assignment. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4703: Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Clients
Proposed Standard- M. Stapp
- B. Volz
- October 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a mechanism for host configuration that includes dynamic assignment of IP addresses and fully qualified domain names. To maintain accurate name-to-IP-address and IP-address-to-name mappings in the DNS, these dynamically assigned addresses and fully qualified domain names (FQDNs) require updates to the DNS. This document identifies situations in which conflicts in the use of fully qualified domain names may arise among DHCP clients and servers, and it describes a strategy for the use of the DHCID DNS resource record (RR) in resolving those conflicts. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a mechanism for host configuration that includes dynamic assignment of IP addresses and fully qualified domain names. To maintain accurate name-to-IP-address and IP-address-to-name mappings in the DNS, these dynamically assigned addresses and fully qualified domain names (FQDNs) require updates to the DNS. This document identifies situations in which conflicts in the use of fully qualified domain names may arise among DHCP clients and servers, and it describes a strategy for the use of the DHCID DNS resource record (RR) in resolving those conflicts. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4562: MAC-Forced Forwarding: A Method for Subscriber Separation on an Ethernet Access Network
Informational- T. Melsen
- S. Blake
- June 2006
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism to ensure layer-2 separation of Local Area Network (LAN) stations accessing an IPv4 gateway over a bridged Ethernet segment.
The mechanism - called "MAC-Forced Forwarding" - implements an Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) proxy function that prohibits Ethernet Media Access Control (MAC) address resolution between hosts located within the same IPv4 subnet but at different customer premises, and in effect directs all upstream traffic to an IPv4 gateway. The IPv4 gateway provides IP-layer connectivity between these same hosts. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism to ensure layer-2 separation of Local Area Network (LAN) stations accessing an IPv4 gateway over a bridged Ethernet segment.
The mechanism - called "MAC-Forced Forwarding" - implements an Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) proxy function that prohibits Ethernet Media Access Control (MAC) address resolution between hosts located within the same IPv4 subnet but at different customer premises, and in effect directs all upstream traffic to an IPv4 gateway. The IPv4 gateway provides IP-layer connectivity between these same hosts. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4477: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP): IPv4 and IPv6 Dual-Stack Issues
Informational- T. Chown
- S. Venaas
- C. Strauf
- May 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
A node may have support for communications using IPv4 and/or IPv6 protocols. Such a node may wish to obtain IPv4 and/or IPv6 configuration settings via the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). The original version of DHCP (RFC 2131) designed for IPv4 has now been complemented by a new DHCPv6 (RFC 3315) for IPv6. This document describes issues identified with dual IP version DHCP interactions, the most important aspect of which is how to handle potential problems in clients processing configuration information received from both DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 servers. The document makes a recommendation on the general strategy on how best to handle such issues and identifies future work to be undertaken. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
A node may have support for communications using IPv4 and/or IPv6 protocols. Such a node may wish to obtain IPv4 and/or IPv6 configuration settings via the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). The original version of DHCP (RFC 2131) designed for IPv4 has now been complemented by a new DHCPv6 (RFC 3315) for IPv6. This document describes issues identified with dual IP version DHCP interactions, the most important aspect of which is how to handle potential problems in clients processing configuration information received from both DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 servers. The document makes a recommendation on the general strategy on how best to handle such issues and identifies future work to be undertaken. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4390: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) over InfiniBand
Proposed Standard- V. Kashyap
- April 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
IP over Infiniband (IPoIB) link-layer address is 20 octets long. This is larger than the 16 octets reserved for the hardware address in a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol/Bootstrap Protocol (DHCP/BOOTP) message. The above inequality imposes restrictions on the use of the DHCP message fields when used over an IPoIB network. This document describes the use of DHCP message fields when implementing DHCP over IPoIB. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
IP over Infiniband (IPoIB) link-layer address is 20 octets long. This is larger than the 16 octets reserved for the hardware address in a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol/Bootstrap Protocol (DHCP/BOOTP) message. The above inequality imposes restrictions on the use of the DHCP message fields when used over an IPoIB network. This document describes the use of DHCP message fields when implementing DHCP over IPoIB. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4436: Detecting Network Attachment in IPv4 (DNAv4)
Proposed Standard- B. Aboba
- J. Carlson
- S. Cheshire
- March 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The time required to detect movement between networks and to obtain (or to continue to use) an IPv4 configuration may be significant as a fraction of the total handover latency in moving between points of attachment. This document synthesizes, from experience in the deployment of hosts supporting ARP, DHCP, and IPv4 Link-Local addresses, a set of steps known as Detecting Network Attachment for IPv4 (DNAv4), in order to decrease the handover latency in moving between points of attachment. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The time required to detect movement between networks and to obtain (or to continue to use) an IPv4 configuration may be significant as a fraction of the total handover latency in moving between points of attachment. This document synthesizes, from experience in the deployment of hosts supporting ARP, DHCP, and IPv4 Link-Local addresses, a set of steps known as Detecting Network Attachment for IPv4 (DNAv4), in order to decrease the handover latency in moving between points of attachment. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4388: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Leasequery
Proposed Standard- R. Woundy
- K. Kinnear
- February 2006
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
A Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) server is the authoritative source of IP addresses that it has provided to DHCPv4 clients. Other processes and devices that already make use of DHCPv4 may need to access this information. The leasequery protocol provides these processes and devices a lightweight way to access IP address information. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
A Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) server is the authoritative source of IP addresses that it has provided to DHCPv4 clients. Other processes and devices that already make use of DHCPv4 may need to access this information. The leasequery protocol provides these processes and devices a lightweight way to access IP address information. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4332: Cisco's Mobile IPv4 Host Configuration Extensions
Informational- K. Leung
- A. Patel
- G. Tsirtsis
- E. Klovning
- December 2005
- Independent Stream publication
Abstract
An IP device requires basic host configuration to be able to communicate. For example, it will typically require an IP address and the address of a DNS server. This information is configured statically or obtained dynamically using Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) or Point-to-Point Protocol/IP Control Protocol (PPP/IPCP). However, both DHCP and PPP/IPCP provide host configuration based on the access network. In Mobile IPv4, the registration process boots up a Mobile Node at an access network, also known as a foreign network. The information to configure the host needs to be based on the home network. This document describes the Cisco vendor-specific extensions to Mobile IPv4 to provide the base host configuration in Registration Request and Reply messages. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Abstract
An IP device requires basic host configuration to be able to communicate. For example, it will typically require an IP address and the address of a DNS server. This information is configured statically or obtained dynamically using Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) or Point-to-Point Protocol/IP Control Protocol (PPP/IPCP). However, both DHCP and PPP/IPCP provide host configuration based on the access network. In Mobile IPv4, the registration process boots up a Mobile Node at an access network, also known as a foreign network. The information to configure the host needs to be based on the home network. This document describes the Cisco vendor-specific extensions to Mobile IPv4 to provide the base host configuration in Registration Request and Reply messages. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
RFC 4243: Vendor-Specific Information Suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Option
Proposed Standard- M. Stapp
- R. Johnson
- T. Palaniappan
- December 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo defines a new Vendor-Specific Information suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol's (DHCP) relay agent information option. The suboption allows a DHCP relay agent to include vendor-specific information in the DHCP messages it forwards, as configured by its administrator. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a new Vendor-Specific Information suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol's (DHCP) relay agent information option. The suboption allows a DHCP relay agent to include vendor-specific information in the DHCP messages it forwards, as configured by its administrator. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4280: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Options for Broadcast and Multicast Control Servers
Proposed Standard- K. Chowdhury
- P. Yegani
- L. Madour
- December 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines new options to discover the Broadcast and Multicast Service (BCMCS) controller in an IP network. BCMCS is being developed for Third generation (3G) cellular telephone networks. Users of the service interact with a controller in the network via the Mobile Node (MN) to derive information required to receive Broadcast and Multicast Service. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol can be used to configure the MN to access a particular controller. This document defines the related options and option codes. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines new options to discover the Broadcast and Multicast Service (BCMCS) controller in an IP network. BCMCS is being developed for Third generation (3G) cellular telephone networks. Users of the service interact with a controller in the network via the Mobile Node (MN) to derive information required to receive Broadcast and Multicast Service. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol can be used to configure the MN to access a particular controller. This document defines the related options and option codes. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4174: The IPv4 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option for the Internet Storage Name Service
Proposed Standard- C. Monia
- J. Tseng
- K. Gibbons
- September 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option to allow Internet Storage Name Service (iSNS) clients to discover the location of the iSNS server automatically through the use of DHCP for IPv4. iSNS provides discovery and management capabilities for Internet SCSI (iSCSI) and Internet Fibre Channel Protocol (iFCP) storage devices in an enterprise-scale IP storage network. iSNS provides intelligent storage management services comparable to those found in Fibre Channel networks, allowing a commodity IP network to function in a similar capacity to that of a storage area network. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option to allow Internet Storage Name Service (iSNS) clients to discover the location of the iSNS server automatically through the use of DHCP for IPv4. iSNS provides discovery and management capabilities for Internet SCSI (iSCSI) and Internet Fibre Channel Protocol (iFCP) storage devices in an enterprise-scale IP storage network. iSNS provides intelligent storage management services comparable to those found in Fibre Channel networks, allowing a commodity IP network to function in a similar capacity to that of a storage area network. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4030: The Authentication Suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Option
Proposed Standard- M. Stapp
- T. Lemon
- April 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Information Option (RFC 3046) conveys information between a DHCP Relay Agent and a DHCP server. This specification defines an authentication suboption for that option, containing a keyed hash in its payload. The suboption supports data integrity and replay protection for relayed DHCP messages. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Information Option (RFC 3046) conveys information between a DHCP Relay Agent and a DHCP server. This specification defines an authentication suboption for that option, containing a keyed hash in its payload. The suboption supports data integrity and replay protection for relayed DHCP messages. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4039: Rapid Commit Option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4)
Proposed Standard- S. Park
- P. Kim
- B. Volz
- March 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) option, modeled on the DHCPv6 Rapid Commit option, for obtaining IP address and configuration information using a 2-message exchange rather than the usual 4-message exchange, expediting client configuration. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) option, modeled on the DHCPv6 Rapid Commit option, for obtaining IP address and configuration information using a 2-message exchange rather than the usual 4-message exchange, expediting client configuration. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3993: Subscriber-ID Suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Option
Proposed Standard- R. Johnson
- T. Palaniappan
- M. Stapp
- March 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo defines a new Subscriber-ID suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol's (DHCP) relay agent information option. The suboption allows a DHCP relay agent to associate a stable "Subscriber-ID" with DHCP client messages in a way that is independent of the client and of the underlying physical network infrastructure. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a new Subscriber-ID suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol's (DHCP) relay agent information option. The suboption allows a DHCP relay agent to associate a stable "Subscriber-ID" with DHCP client messages in a way that is independent of the client and of the underlying physical network infrastructure. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 4014: Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) Attributes Suboption for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Relay Agent Information Option
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- J. Schnizlein
- February 2005
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The RADIUS Attributes suboption enables a network element to pass identification and authorization attributes received during RADIUS authentication to a DHCP server. When the DHCP server receives a message from a relay agent containing a RADIUS Attributes suboption, it extracts the contents of the suboption and uses that information in selecting configuration parameters for the client. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The RADIUS Attributes suboption enables a network element to pass identification and authorization attributes received during RADIUS authentication to a DHCP server. When the DHCP server receives a message from a relay agent containing a RADIUS Attributes suboption, it extracts the contents of the suboption and uses that information in selecting configuration parameters for the client. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3942: Reclassifying Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) Options
Proposed Standard- B. Volz
- November 2004
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document updates RFC 2132 to reclassify Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) option codes 128 to 223 (decimal) as publicly defined options to be managed by IANA in accordance with RFC 2939. This document directs IANA to make these option codes available for assignment as publicly defined DHCP options for future options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document updates RFC 2132 to reclassify Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4) option codes 128 to 223 (decimal) as publicly defined options to be managed by IANA in accordance with RFC 2939. This document directs IANA to make these option codes available for assignment as publicly defined DHCP options for future options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3925: Vendor-Identifying Vendor Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol version 4 (DHCPv4)
Proposed Standard- J. Littlefield
- October 2004
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options for Vendor Class and Vendor-Specific Information can be limiting or ambiguous when a DHCP client represents multiple vendors. This document defines two new options, modeled on the IPv6 options for vendor class and vendor-specific information, that contain Enterprise Numbers to remove ambiguity. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options for Vendor Class and Vendor-Specific Information can be limiting or ambiguous when a DHCP client represents multiple vendors. This document defines two new options, modeled on the IPv6 options for vendor class and vendor-specific information, that contain Enterprise Numbers to remove ambiguity. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3825: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Option for Coordinate-based Location Configuration Information
Proposed Standard- J. Polk
- J. Schnizlein
- M. Linsner
- July 2004
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document specifies a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Option for the coordinate-based geographic location of the client. The Location Configuration Information (LCI) includes latitude, longitude, and altitude, with resolution indicators for each. The reference datum for these values is also included. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Obsoleted by RFC 6225
Abstract
This document specifies a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Option for the coordinate-based geographic location of the client. The Location Configuration Information (LCI) includes latitude, longitude, and altitude, with resolution indicators for each. The reference datum for these values is also included. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3736: Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Service for IPv6
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- April 2004
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol service for IPv6 (DHCPv6) is used by nodes to obtain configuration information, such as the addresses of DNS recursive name servers, that does not require the maintenance of any dynamic state for individual clients. A node that uses stateless DHCP must have obtained its IPv6 addresses through some other mechanism, typically stateless address autoconfiguration. This document explains which parts of RFC 3315 must be implemented in each of the different kinds of DHCP agents so that agent can support stateless DHCP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Obsoleted by RFC 8415
Abstract
Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol service for IPv6 (DHCPv6) is used by nodes to obtain configuration information, such as the addresses of DNS recursive name servers, that does not require the maintenance of any dynamic state for individual clients. A node that uses stateless DHCP must have obtained its IPv6 addresses through some other mechanism, typically stateless address autoconfiguration. This document explains which parts of RFC 3315 must be implemented in each of the different kinds of DHCP agents so that agent can support stateless DHCP. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3679: Unused Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option Codes
Informational- R. Droms
- January 2004
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Prior to the publication of RFC 2489 (which was updated by RFC 2939), several option codes were assigned to proposed Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options that were subsequently never used. This document lists those unused option codes and directs IANA to make these option codes available for assignment to other DHCP options in the future. The document also lists several option codes that are not currently documented in an RFC but should not be made available for reassignment to future DHCP options.
Abstract
Prior to the publication of RFC 2489 (which was updated by RFC 2939), several option codes were assigned to proposed Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) options that were subsequently never used. This document lists those unused option codes and directs IANA to make these option codes available for assignment to other DHCP options in the future. The document also lists several option codes that are not currently documented in an RFC but should not be made available for reassignment to future DHCP options.
RFC 3634: Key Distribution Center (KDC) Server Address Sub-option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Option
Proposed Standard- K. Luehrs
- R. Woundy
- J. Bevilacqua
- N. Davoust
- December 2003
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new sub-option for the CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option code for conveying the network addresses of Key Distribution Center (KDC) servers.
Abstract
This document defines a new sub-option for the CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option code for conveying the network addresses of Key Distribution Center (KDC) servers.
RFC 3633: IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6
Proposed Standard- O. Troan
- R. Droms
- December 2003
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Prefix Delegation options provide a mechanism for automated delegation of IPv6 prefixes using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). This mechanism is intended for delegating a long-lived prefix from a delegating router to a requesting router, across an administrative boundary, where the delegating router does not require knowledge about the topology of the links in the network to which the prefixes will be assigned.
Obsoleted by RFC 8415
Abstract
The Prefix Delegation options provide a mechanism for automated delegation of IPv6 prefixes using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP). This mechanism is intended for delegating a long-lived prefix from a delegating router to a requesting router, across an administrative boundary, where the delegating router does not require knowledge about the topology of the links in the network to which the prefixes will be assigned.
RFC 3594: PacketCable Security Ticket Control Sub-Option for the DHCP CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Option
Proposed Standard- P. Duffy
- September 2003
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new sub-option for the DHCP CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Option. This new sub-option will be used to direct CableLabs Client Devices (CCDs) to invalidate security tickets stored in CCD non volatile memory (i.e., locally persisted security tickets). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new sub-option for the DHCP CableLabs Client Configuration (CCC) Option. This new sub-option will be used to direct CableLabs Client Devices (CCDs) to invalidate security tickets stored in CCD non volatile memory (i.e., locally persisted security tickets). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3527: Link Selection sub-option for the Relay Agent Information Option for DHCPv4
Proposed Standard- K. Kinnear
- M. Stapp
- R. Johnson
- J. Kumarasamy
- April 2003
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes the link selection sub-option of the relay- agent-information option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4). The giaddr specifies an IP address which determines both a subnet, and thereby a link on which a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) client resides as well as an IP address that can be used to communicate with the relay agent. The subnet-selection option allows the functions of the giaddr to be split so that when one entity is performing as a DHCP proxy, it can specify the subnet/link from which to allocate an IP address, which is different from the IP address with which it desires to communicate with the DHCP server. Analogous situations exist where the relay agent needs to specify the subnet/link on which a DHCP client resides, which is different from an IP address that can be used to communicate with the relay agent. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes the link selection sub-option of the relay- agent-information option for the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4). The giaddr specifies an IP address which determines both a subnet, and thereby a link on which a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) client resides as well as an IP address that can be used to communicate with the relay agent. The subnet-selection option allows the functions of the giaddr to be split so that when one entity is performing as a DHCP proxy, it can specify the subnet/link from which to allocate an IP address, which is different from the IP address with which it desires to communicate with the DHCP server. Analogous situations exist where the relay agent needs to specify the subnet/link on which a DHCP client resides, which is different from an IP address that can be used to communicate with the relay agent. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3495: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Option for CableLabs Client Configuration
Proposed Standard- B. Beser
- P. Duffy
- March 2003
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option that will be used to configure various devices deployed within CableLabs architectures. Specifically, the document describes DHCP option content that will be used to configure one class of CableLabs client device: a PacketCable Media Terminal Adapter (MTA). The option content defined within this document will be extended as future CableLabs client devices are developed. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option that will be used to configure various devices deployed within CableLabs architectures. Specifically, the document describes DHCP option content that will be used to configure one class of CableLabs client device: a PacketCable Media Terminal Adapter (MTA). The option content defined within this document will be extended as future CableLabs client devices are developed. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3456: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4) Configuration of IPsec Tunnel Mode
Proposed Standard- B. Patel
- B. Aboba
- S. Kelly
- V. Gupta
- January 2003
- IETF publication
- Security Area
Abstract
This memo explores the requirements for host configuration in IPsec tunnel mode, and describes how the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4) may be leveraged for configuration. In many remote access scenarios, a mechanism for making the remote host appear to be present on the local corporate network is quite useful. This may be accomplished by assigning the host a "virtual" address from the corporate network, and then tunneling traffic via IPsec from the host's ISP-assigned address to the corporate security gateway. In IPv4, DHCP provides for such remote host configuration. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo explores the requirements for host configuration in IPsec tunnel mode, and describes how the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4) may be leveraged for configuration. In many remote access scenarios, a mechanism for making the remote host appear to be present on the local corporate network is quite useful. This may be accomplished by assigning the host a "virtual" address from the corporate network, and then tunneling traffic via IPsec from the host's ISP-assigned address to the corporate security gateway. In IPv4, DHCP provides for such remote host configuration. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3442: The Classless Static Route Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 4
Proposed Standard- T. Lemon
- S. Cheshire
- B. Volz
- December 2002
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option which is passed from the DHCP Server to the DHCP Client to configure a list of static routes in the client. The network destinations in these routes are classless - each routing table entry includes a subnet mask. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option which is passed from the DHCP Server to the DHCP Client to configure a list of static routes in the client. The network destinations in these routes are classless - each routing table entry includes a subnet mask. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3396: Encoding Long Options in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)
Proposed Standard- T. Lemon
- S. Cheshire
- November 2002
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies the processing rules for DHCPv4 options
that appear multiple times in the same message. Multiple
instances of the same option are generated when an option exceeds
255 octets in size (the maximum size of a single option) or when
an option needs to be split apart in order to take advantage of
DHCP option overloading. When multiple instances of the same
option appear in the options, file and/or sname fields in a DHCP
packet, the contents of these options are concatenated together
to form a single option prior to processing.
Abstract
This document specifies the processing rules for DHCPv4 options
that appear multiple times in the same message. Multiple
instances of the same option are generated when an option exceeds
255 octets in size (the maximum size of a single option) or when
an option needs to be split apart in order to take advantage of
DHCP option overloading. When multiple instances of the same
option appear in the options, file and/or sname fields in a DHCP
packet, the contents of these options are concatenated together
to form a single option prior to processing.
RFC 3397: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Domain Search Option
Proposed Standard- B. Aboba
- S. Cheshire
- November 2002
- IETF publication
- General Area
Abstract
This document defines a new DHCP option which is passed from the DHCP
Server to the DHCP Client to specify the domain search list used when
resolving hostnames using DNS.
Abstract
This document defines a new DHCP option which is passed from the DHCP
Server to the DHCP Client to specify the domain search list used when
resolving hostnames using DNS.
RFC 3361: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP-for-IPv4) Option for Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Servers
Proposed Standard- H. Schulzrinne
- August 2002
- IETF publication
- Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Area
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP-for-IPv4 option that contains a list of
domain names or IPv4 addresses that can be mapped to one or more SIP
outbound proxy servers. This is one of the many methods that a SIP
client can use to obtain the addresses of such a local SIP server.
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP-for-IPv4 option that contains a list of
domain names or IPv4 addresses that can be mapped to one or more SIP
outbound proxy servers. This is one of the many methods that a SIP
client can use to obtain the addresses of such a local SIP server.
RFC 3256: The DOCSIS (Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specifications) Device Class DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Sub-option
Proposed Standard- D. Jones
- R. Woundy
- April 2002
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document proposes a new sub-option to the DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Option. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document proposes a new sub-option to the DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) Relay Agent Information Option. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3203: DHCP reconfigure extension
Proposed Standard- Y. T'Joens
- C. Hublet
- P. De Schrijver
- December 2001
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines extensions to DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) to allow dynamic reconfiguration of a single host triggered by the DHCP server (e.g., a new IP address and/or local configuration parameters). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines extensions to DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) to allow dynamic reconfiguration of a single host triggered by the DHCP server (e.g., a new IP address and/or local configuration parameters). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3118: Authentication for DHCP Messages
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- W. Arbaugh
- June 2001
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option through which authorization tickets can be easily generated and newly attached hosts with proper authorization can be automatically configured from an authenticated DHCP server. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option through which authorization tickets can be easily generated and newly attached hosts with proper authorization can be automatically configured from an authenticated DHCP server. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3074: DHC Load Balancing Algorithm
Proposed Standard- B. Volz
- S. Gonczi
- T. Lemon
- R. Stevens
- February 2001
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document proposes a method of algorithmic load balancing. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document proposes a method of algorithmic load balancing. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3046: DHCP Relay Agent Information Option
Proposed Standard- M. Patrick
- January 2001
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Newer high-speed public Internet access technologies call for a high- speed modem to have a local area network (LAN) attachment to one or more customer premise hosts. It is advantageous to use the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) as defined in RFC 2131 to assign customer premise host IP addresses in this environment. However, a number of security and scaling problems arise with such "public" DHCP use. This document describes a new DHCP option to address these issues. This option extends the set of DHCP options as defined in RFC 2132. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Newer high-speed public Internet access technologies call for a high- speed modem to have a local area network (LAN) attachment to one or more customer premise hosts. It is advantageous to use the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) as defined in RFC 2131 to assign customer premise host IP addresses in this environment. However, a number of security and scaling problems arise with such "public" DHCP use. This document describes a new DHCP option to address these issues. This option extends the set of DHCP options as defined in RFC 2132. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3004: The User Class Option for DHCP
Proposed Standard- G. Stump
- R. Droms
- Y. Gu
- R. Vyaghrapuri
- A. Demirtjis
- B. Beser
- J. Privat
- November 2000
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This option is used by a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) client to optionally identify the type or category of user or applications it represents. The information contained in this option is an opaque field that represents the user class of which the client is a member. Based on this class, a DHCP server selects the appropriate address pool to assign an address to the client and the appropriate configuration parameters. This option should be configurable by a user. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This option is used by a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) client to optionally identify the type or category of user or applications it represents. The information contained in this option is an opaque field that represents the user class of which the client is a member. Based on this class, a DHCP server selects the appropriate address pool to assign an address to the client and the appropriate configuration parameters. This option should be configurable by a user. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 3011: The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP
Proposed Standard- G. Waters
- November 2000
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option for selecting the subnet on which to allocate an address. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option for selecting the subnet on which to allocate an address. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2937: The Name Service Search Option for DHCP
Proposed Standard- C. Smith
- September 2000
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option which is passed from the DHCP Server to the DHCP Client to specify the order in which name services should be consulted when resolving hostnames and other information. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a new Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) option which is passed from the DHCP Server to the DHCP Client to specify the order in which name services should be consulted when resolving hostnames and other information. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2939: BCP 43: Procedures and IANA Guidelines for Definition of New DHCP Options and Message Types
Best Current Practice- R. Droms
- September 2000
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes the procedure for defining new DHCP options and message types. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This document describes the procedure for defining new DHCP options and message types. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 2855: DHCP for IEEE 1394
Proposed Standard- K. Fujisawa
- June 2000
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This memo describes specific usage of some fields of DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) messages. IEEE Std 1394-1995 is a standard for a High Performance Serial Bus. Since 1394 uses a different link-layer addressing method than conventional IEEE802/Ethernet, the usage of some fields must be clarified to achieve interoperability. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This memo describes specific usage of some fields of DHCP (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol) messages. IEEE Std 1394-1995 is a standard for a High Performance Serial Bus. Since 1394 uses a different link-layer addressing method than conventional IEEE802/Ethernet, the usage of some fields must be clarified to achieve interoperability. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2610: DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol
Proposed Standard- C. Perkins
- E. Guttman
- June 1999
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP network. Entities using the Service Location Protocol need to find out the address of Directory Agents in order to transact messages. Another option provides an assignment of scope for configuration of SLP User and Service Agents. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP network. Entities using the Service Location Protocol need to find out the address of Directory Agents in order to transact messages. Another option provides an assignment of scope for configuration of SLP User and Service Agents. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2563: DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Auto-Configuration in IPv4 Clients
Proposed Standard- R. Troll
- May 1999
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism by which DHCP servers are able to tell clients that they do not have an IP address to offer, and that the client should not generate an IP address it's own. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document describes a mechanism by which DHCP servers are able to tell clients that they do not have an IP address to offer, and that the client should not generate an IP address it's own. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2485: DHCP Option for The Open Group's User Authentication Protocol
Proposed Standard- S. Drach
- January 1999
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP option that contains a list of pointers to User Authentication Protocol servers that provide user authentication services for clients that conform to The Open Group Network Computing Client Technical Standard. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines a DHCP option that contains a list of pointers to User Authentication Protocol servers that provide user authentication services for clients that conform to The Open Group Network Computing Client Technical Standard. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2489: BCP 29: Procedure for Defining New DHCP Options
Best Current Practice- R. Droms
- January 1999
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document describes the procedure for defining new DHCP options. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Obsoleted by RFC 2939
Abstract
This document describes the procedure for defining new DHCP options. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC 2241: DHCP Options for Novell Directory Services
Proposed Standard- D. Provan
- November 1997
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines three new DHCP options for delivering configuration information to clients of the Novell Directory Services. This document defines three new DHCP options for delivering configuration information to clients of the Novell Directory Services. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines three new DHCP options for delivering configuration information to clients of the Novell Directory Services. This document defines three new DHCP options for delivering configuration information to clients of the Novell Directory Services. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2242: NetWare/IP Domain Name and Information
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- K. Fong
- November 1997
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document defines options that carry NetWare/IP domain name and NetWare/IP sub-options to DHCP clients. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document defines options that carry NetWare/IP domain name and NetWare/IP sub-options to DHCP clients. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2131: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
Draft Standard- R. Droms
- March 1997
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCPIP network. DHCP is based on the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP), adding the capability of automatic allocation of reusable network addresses and additional configuration options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCPIP network. DHCP is based on the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP), adding the capability of automatic allocation of reusable network addresses and additional configuration options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 2132: DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions
Draft Standard- S. Alexander
- R. Droms
- March 1997
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies the current set of DHCP options. Future options will be specified in separate RFCs. The current list of valid options is also available in ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
This document specifies the current set of DHCP options. Future options will be specified in separate RFCs. The current list of valid options is also available in ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1531: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- October 1993
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP network. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Obsoleted by RFC 1541
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP network. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1532: Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol
Proposed Standard- W. Wimer
- October 1993
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
Some aspects of the BOOTP protocol were rather loosely defined in its original specification. In particular, only a general description was provided for the behavior of "BOOTP relay agents" (originally called BOOTP forwarding agents"). The client behavior description also suffered in certain ways. This memo attempts to clarify and strengthen the specification in these areas. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Obsoleted by RFC 1542
Abstract
Some aspects of the BOOTP protocol were rather loosely defined in its original specification. In particular, only a general description was provided for the behavior of "BOOTP relay agents" (originally called BOOTP forwarding agents"). The client behavior description also suffered in certain ways. This memo attempts to clarify and strengthen the specification in these areas. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1533: DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions
Proposed Standard- S. Alexander
- R. Droms
- October 1993
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
This document specifies the current set of DHCP options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Obsoleted by RFC 2132
Abstract
This document specifies the current set of DHCP options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1534: Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP
Draft Standard- R. Droms
- October 1993
- IETF publication
- Internet Area
Abstract
DHCP provides a superset of the functions provided by BOOTP. This document describes the interactions between DHCP and BOOTP network participants. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
DHCP provides a superset of the functions provided by BOOTP. This document describes the interactions between DHCP and BOOTP network participants. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1541: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
Proposed Standard- R. Droms
- October 1993
- Legacy publication
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP network. DHCP is based on the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) adding the capability of automatic allocation of reusable network addresses and additional configuration options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Obsoleted by RFC 2131
Abstract
The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) provides a framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP network. DHCP is based on the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) adding the capability of automatic allocation of reusable network addresses and additional configuration options. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1542: Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol
Draft Standard- W. Wimer
- October 1993
- Legacy publication
Abstract
Some aspects of the BOOTP protocol were rather loosely defined in its original specification. In particular, only a general description was provided for the behavior of "BOOTP relay agents" (originally called "BOOTP forwarding agents"). The client behavior description also suffered in certain ways. This memo attempts to clarify and strengthen the specification in these areas. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Abstract
Some aspects of the BOOTP protocol were rather loosely defined in its original specification. In particular, only a general description was provided for the behavior of "BOOTP relay agents" (originally called "BOOTP forwarding agents"). The client behavior description also suffered in certain ways. This memo attempts to clarify and strengthen the specification in these areas. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
RFC 1497: BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions
Draft Standard- J. Reynolds
- August 1993
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This RFC is a slight revision and extension of RFC-1048 by Philip Prindeville, who should be credited with the original work in this memo. This memo is a status report on the vendor information extensions used in the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP).
Obsoleted by RFC 1533
Abstract
This RFC is a slight revision and extension of RFC-1048 by Philip Prindeville, who should be credited with the original work in this memo. This memo is a status report on the vendor information extensions used in the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP).
RFC 1395: BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions
Draft Standard- J. Reynolds
- January 1993
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This RFC is a slight revision and extension of RFC-1048 by Philip Prindeville, who should be credited with the original work in this memo. This memo will be updated as additional tags are defined. This edition introduces Tag 14 for Merit Dump File, Tag 15 for Domain Name, Tag 16 for Swap Server and Tag 17 for Root Path. This memo is a status report on the vendor information extensions used int the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP).
Abstract
This RFC is a slight revision and extension of RFC-1048 by Philip Prindeville, who should be credited with the original work in this memo. This memo will be updated as additional tags are defined. This edition introduces Tag 14 for Merit Dump File, Tag 15 for Domain Name, Tag 16 for Swap Server and Tag 17 for Root Path. This memo is a status report on the vendor information extensions used int the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP).
RFC 1084: BOOTP vendor information extensions
Unknown- J.K. Reynolds
- December 1988
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This RFC is a slight revision and extension of RFC-1048 by Philip Prindeville. This memo will be updated as additional tags are are defined. This edition introduces Tag 13 for Boot File Size. Comments and suggestions for improvements are sought.
Abstract
This RFC is a slight revision and extension of RFC-1048 by Philip Prindeville. This memo will be updated as additional tags are are defined. This edition introduces Tag 13 for Boot File Size. Comments and suggestions for improvements are sought.
RFC 1048: BOOTP vendor information extensions
Unknown- P.A. Prindeville
- February 1988
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This memo proposes an addition to the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP). Comments and suggestions for improvements are sought.
Abstract
This memo proposes an addition to the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP). Comments and suggestions for improvements are sought.
RFC 951: Bootstrap Protocol
Draft Standard- W.J. Croft
- J. Gilmore
- September 1985
- Legacy publication
Abstract
This RFC describes an IP/UDP bootstrap protocol (BOOTP) which allows a diskless client machine to discover its own IP address, the address of a server host, and the name of a file to be loaded into memory and executed. The bootstrap operation can be thought of as consisting of TWO PHASES. This RFC describes the first phase, which could be labeled `address determination and bootfile selection'. After this address and filename information is obtained, control passes to the second phase of the bootstrap where a file transfer occurs. The file transfer will typically use the TFTP protocol, since it is intended that both phases reside in PROM on the client. However BOOTP could also work with other protocols such as SFTP or FTP. This RFC suggests a proposed protocol for the ARPA-Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Abstract
This RFC describes an IP/UDP bootstrap protocol (BOOTP) which allows a diskless client machine to discover its own IP address, the address of a server host, and the name of a file to be loaded into memory and executed. The bootstrap operation can be thought of as consisting of TWO PHASES. This RFC describes the first phase, which could be labeled `address determination and bootfile selection'. After this address and filename information is obtained, control passes to the second phase of the bootstrap where a file transfer occurs. The file transfer will typically use the TFTP protocol, since it is intended that both phases reside in PROM on the client. However BOOTP could also work with other protocols such as SFTP or FTP. This RFC suggests a proposed protocol for the ARPA-Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Subscribe to DHCP
Get notified when:
- RFC changes to status, obsoleted by, updates, updated by, or subseries.
- New RFC added to this subject or below
- The subject was merged into another.