dhcprequest function (dhcp: message 4 of 20)

[Ted Lemon]

On Mar 29, 2004, at 6:36 PM, dhcp.50.CHRIS94561 at spamgourmet.com wrote:
> Am I missing something? Is there some clarification to be made? Is 
> there a
> clear statement somewhere including "MUST" or "required" that clearly
> illustrates the requirement to broadcast NAKs?

What's going on here is that there are flaws in the RFC that make it 
somewhat self-contradictory.   Most implementations just do what seems 
reasonable, and generally interoperate reasonably well, but there have 
been serious interoperability problems because of imprecise 
specifications.   In this case, though, I think it's pretty clear what 
to do.   If you unicast a DHCPNAK directly to a client in the 
REQUESTING state, you are not following the protocol.