[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:02:09 +1200
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2007-09-13 18:56, Gert Doering wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 03:46:31PM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
> >> i agree that vendors would implement whatever they would need to, but
> >> iirc the group is here to give guidance for operations.
<snip>
> >
> > Routers are there, so RAs are there anyway. DHCP is an extra.
>
> As far as I can see, in a minimal ("dentist's office") scenario,
> the one thing a host must have in addition to addressing and
> routing info is DNS servers. Since auto-configuration was
> explicitly designed to support the minimal scenario, it seems
> entirely rational to add DNS server info to RA. On the other hand,
> DHCP can support dozens of additional features, and we surely
> shouldn't import that level of complexity into RA.
>
That sounds reasonable to me.
Would the following be a fair summary of the scenarios being talked
around?
1. No RAs, link local only addressing, Zeroconf techniques/Multicast DNS
2. RAs, ll + RA announced prefixes, RA announced DNS server(s)
3. RAs, ll + RA announced prefixes, RA announced DNS server(s), DHCP
for any other node configuration options
4. RAs, ll + RA announced prefixes, DHCP announced DNS server(s) + other node
configuration options.
Regards,
Mark.