To:
John Schnizlein <jschnizl@cisco.com>
cc:
Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>, <dnsop@cafax.se>
From:
Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Date:
Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:34:54 +0300 (EEST)
In-Reply-To:
<4.3.2.7.2.20030925134613.020cae00@wells.cisco.com>
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: How IPv6 host gets DNS address
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, John Schnizlein wrote: > At 01:17 PM 9/25/2003, Tim Chown wrote: > Re: draft vienna minutes (sorry about the delay) > >So this is a reasnoably fair reflection of the lack of concensus on RA vs > >DHCP for DNS resolver discovery in Vienna. > > My impression is different: The rough consensus is to just use DHCPv6 > as the protocol - either the "light" stateless subset in the router, > or the statefull server. There seems to be a small but vocal set of > people who want to invent something new rather than use the v6 variant > of the dynamic host configuration protocol that is known to work. Well, as it is, it is up to the chairs (by RFC2418) to decide what the consensus is. Currently, at least, I don't agree with this characterization of rough consensus. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.