On Sat, Dec 11, 2004 at 04:41:17AM -0500, Chuck Swiger wrote:[ ... ]...but there is more there to read. It's fine to let an interface have a 169.254/16 IP and a "real" IP (assigned by DHCP, the user, etc) for a little while during transitions, but not forever.
Still, what's worse, having two correct but potentially confusing addresses, and everything still working; or having DHCP and autoipd fighting over which one determines the one and only IP address? I'll have to check how Mac OS X handles this, but unless we merge zeroconf in dhclient (ugh!) or vice versa, I don't see an alternative which is as convenient for the user. Do you?
If your first implementation happens to leave the interface with a 169.254 IP address, it's doing something it shouldn't, however that is likely to be mostly harmless until you or someone has a chance to improve the implementation.
autoipd and DHCP/dhclient should never get into a fight, nor should autoipd conflict with a manually-assigned network config: autoipd should only try to configure a link-local address during the interval when nothing else has done so, or if autoipd has reason to believe that the existing configuration is invalid (ie, after the carrier drops). Any time dhclient gets a lease and assigns an IP address to an interface, autoipd needs to back out of the way.
-- -Chuck _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
