Steve Teusch writes: > Any comments? => fix the client (or the entity which does not support any order for DHCP options) as it is clearly not RFC compliant. BTW the option 82 RAI has a SHOULD to be last, and END/255 must be the very last one possibly followed by PAD/0 simply because anything after is ignored... So there is *nothing* else in RFCs about option order and as far as I know it is at implementor choice (which is different for ISC DHCP and Kea BTW).
Thanks Francis Dupont <[email protected]> PS: you can use a hook to pack options in your prefer order. _______________________________________________ Kea-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/kea-users
