RE: proposal for a compromise on DNS discovery

["BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE" <luc.beloeil@francetelecom.com>]

Hi Doug

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Doug Barton [mailto:DougB@DougBarton.net]
> Envoye : mardi 29 juillet 2003 05:15
> 
> 
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003, BELOEIL Luc FTRD/DMI/CAE wrote:
> 
> > Ok DHCP servers are embedded in current IPv4 SOHO router.
> 
> There, and LOTS of other places.
> 

Good point. But "LOTS of other places" should be clarified for the sake
of arguments.

> > This is cheap and efficient. But this is not a valid argument to to
> > say that DHCP is THE only valid solution to announce DNS resolver
> > server IPv6 address.
> 
> DHCP in SOHO networks alone isn't, no. However, the fact that 
> just about
> every network of any size has, or can easily deploy dhcp(lite) is.
> 

Don't conclude so quickly please. 
- "every network of any size" do not always have DHCP. At least one
example: DSL access use currently PPP+IPCP so as to configure IPv4
"parameters".
- "or can easily deploy dhcp(lite": ok it is not so clear for me.
Deployment is one thing, then we should be sure that such a solution
would work in a lot of situation. I have the case where several DHCP
servers (one stateless, and another statefull for example) could deal a
same LAN, and there I still miss the proper engineering rules not to
confuse a DHCP client.

> > There was a analysis made by the DNS Discovery Design Team 
> in march 2001
> > (draft-ietf-ipnwg-dns-discovery-01.txt). Wouldn't it be 
> valuable to go
> > on or to restart such a work ? (instead of this no-end battle?)
> 
> The "battle" would end if the RA DNS proponents would stop 
> re-proposing
> it. :)
> 

:)

> Doug
> 

Luc

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.