Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP

[Niall O'Reilly <Niall.oReilly@ucd.ie>]

On 11 Sep 2007, at 20:30, Gert Doering wrote:

> I didn't want to re-open that discussion (just commented on the  
> document
> that comments were solicited for).  But the most important argument  
> for
> us is "RA is there anyway, why undergo the effort to set up yet  
> another
> service?".

	[ snip ]

	Especially _just_ for finding the DNS.

> Everbody's network varies,

	[ Heck, our network varies, too! 8-) ]

	Seriously though, I would see it as an unfortunate mistake to take
	the view that the capabilities of RA and DHCP to provide configuration
	data should be strictly disjoint.  The important point here is the
	distinction between 'capability' and actual 'advertisement'.

	If DHCP is a 'natural' means to meet some service requirement, it may
	be convenient to have it provide configuration data which might
	otherwise be provided by RA.  Implementors should take care to
	provide configuration options for both, as they will be needed in
	order to allow netadmins the scope they need to exercise their options
	and avoid conflicting advertisements.


	Best regards,

	Niall O'Reilly
	University College Dublin IT Services

	PGP key ID: AE995ED9 (see www.pgp.net)
	Fingerprint: 23DC C6DE 8874 2432 2BE0 3905 7987 E48D AE99 5ED9

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part