|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
RFC - Draft Standard (IETF Stream)
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
IETF RFC 2131 is an essential part of DHCP and is included as normative reference rather than including the full text.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=2131
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
This RFC has been in existence, in previous versions, since October 1993. RFC 2131 is a de-facto standard and is very widely used and implemented in most TCP/IP enabled CPEs (e..g PCs, DSL routers, etc.).
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 2131 was published in March 1997. It is a standards-track document and is currently in the "Draft Standard" state. Current standards status of this document can be found at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/std/std1.txt
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
RFC 3396 updates this document and several others add new DHCP options to the basic set defined in RFC 2131.
Updated by IETF RFC 3396, 4361 and 5494
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] Acetta, M., "Resource Location Protocol", RFC 887, CMU, December 1983./
[2] Alexander, S., and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions", RFC 1533, Lachman Technology, Inc., Bucknell University, October 1993./
[3] Braden, R., Editor, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, USC/Information Sciences Institute, October 1989./
[4] Braden, R., Editor, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support, STD 3, RFC 1123, USC/Information Sciences Institute, October 1989./
[5] Brownell, D, "Dynamic Reverse Address Resolution Protocol (DRARP)", Work in Progress./
[6] Comer, D., and R. Droms, "Uniform Access to Internet Directory Services", Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM '90 (Special issue of Computer Communications Review), 20(4):50--59, 1990./
[7] Croft, B., and J. Gilmore, "Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP)", RFC 951, Stanford and SUN Microsystems, September 1985./
[8] Deering, S., "ICMP Router Discovery Messages", RFC 1256, Xerox PARC, September 1991./
[9] Droms, D., "Interoperation between DHCP and BOOTP", RFC 1534, Bucknell University, October 1993. /
[10] Finlayson, R., Mann, T., Mogul, J., and M. Theimer, "A Reverse Address Resolution Protocol", RFC 903, Stanford, June 1984./
[11] Gray C., and D. Cheriton, "Leases: An Efficient Fault-Tolerant Mechanism for Distributed File Cache Consistency", In Proc. of the Twelfth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Design, 1989./
[12] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names -- Concepts and Facilities", STD 13, RFC 1034, USC/Information Sciences Institute, November 1987./
[13] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names -- Implementation and Specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, USC/Information Sciences Institute, November 1987./
[14] Mogul J., and S. Deering, "Path MTU Discovery", RFC 1191, November 1990./
[15] Morgan, R., "Dynamic IP Address Assignment for Ethernet Attached Hosts", Work in Progress./
[16] Postel, J., "Internet Control Message Protocol", STD 5, RFC 792, USC/Information Sciences Institute, September 1981./
[17] Reynolds, J., "BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions", RFC 1497, USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1993./
[18] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, RFC 1700, USC/Information Sciences Institute, October 1994./
[19] Jeffrey Schiller and Mark Rosenstein. A Protocol for the Dynamic Assignment of IP Addresses for use on an Ethernet. (Available from the Athena Project, MIT), 1989./
[20] Sollins, K., "The TFTP Protocol (Revision 2)",RFC 783, NIC, June 1981./
[21] Wimer, W., "Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 1542, Carnegie Mellon University, October 1993.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
References should always be made to RFC numbers (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References not to be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs.
|
|
