On Tue, 23 Jan 2018 11:12:41 +0000 (UTC)
Curt <cu...@free.fr> wrote:
> On 2018-01-23, Andy Hawkins <a...@gently.org.uk> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > In article <20180122185135.GA12212@alum>,
> > David Wright<deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> >>> You should be able to do that with IPv4 too. If DHCP address
> >>> allocation fails,
> >>
> >> Elaborate on this please. What do you mean by "fails".
> >> What am I meant to want to fail?
> >
> > If a host that's expecting to receive its address via DHCP receives
> > no response from the DHCP server, it should fall back automatically
> > to a 'link local' address.
>
> Is this what you're referring to ("an IPv4 address within the
> 169.254/16 prefix that is valid for communication with other devices
> connected to the same physical (or logical) link," failing--or in the
> absence of--automatic or manual assignment)?
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3927
Indeed so. It ensures that if the DHCP server temporarily suffers a
problem, any Windows machine on the network (I have no data for Linux)
that gets rebooted stands absolutely zero chance of communicating with
any network machine which hasn't been rebooted. The idea that the
previous working address (even within the lease period), or the
[Windows] manually entered 'alternate' address should be tried does not
arise.
I would hope that the Linux network management utilities take a more
intelligent view of the situation, I haven't yet had cause to find out.
--
Joe
