To:
Alain.Durand@Sun.COM (Alain Durand)
Cc:
bmanning@karoshi.com (bill), dnsop@cafax.se, itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino)
From:
bill <bmanning@karoshi.com>
Date:
Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:30:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To:
<703BB49A-1531-11D8-BA39-00039376A6AA@sun.com> from "Alain Durand" at Nov 12, 2003 08:58:28 AM
Sender:
owner-dnsop@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: DNS discovery
> > > On Nov 12, 2003, at 7:50 AM, bill wrote: > > > other than the badness w/ wka, I fail to see the need to > > continue w/ this "tempest in a teapot". Both RA and DHCP > > will provide an IP address to a node that seeks for help. > > presume that both are implemented... > > Are there any demonstrated benefits of having both? > I failed to see that. However there are obvious risk > anytime you have two mechanisms to achieve the same thing. > > - Alain. > well, I can see nodes that move between topologies, some where RA is used/prefered and some where DHCP is used prefered. historically, the SA's for DHCP service are distinct from the SA's who manage routing, so moving forward, we are providing a tool to each community that performs essentially the same task. The end systems have had to deal with getting IP addresses assigned from multiple places (static, RA, DHCP) already - listing DNS server preference when there are multiple inputs -can't- be that hard. And its not like the IETF has not promoted two solutions in the past... can you say OSPF and ISIS? Sure you can. --bill #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.