> James R. Cutler james.cutler at consultant.com > Fri Feb 6 18:00:52 UTC 2009 > > DHCP items are end system considerations, not routing network > considerations. > > The network operations staff and router configuration engineers do not > generally concern themselves with end systems. > > End systems generally are managed quite independently from the routing > network. And, they are more subject to the vagaries of day to day > business variability. Note the "one place" in the quoted message below. > > The only overlap is broadcast forwarding for DHCP initiation. > > Besides, configuration control is hard enough for router engineers > without adding the burden of changing end system requirements. Adding > the forwarding entries is almost too much already! ;) > > So, for routing network operators to denigrate DHCP is probably due to > lack of consideration of the end user system requirements. And those > who denigrate DHCP and say "just hard code it" make end system > management that much more difficult. > > I still conclude that DHCP is a useful tool for both IPv4 and IPv6 > systems.
В 11:10 -0700 на 22.10.2009 (чт), Owen DeLong написа: > OK... Here's the real requirement: > > Systems administrators who do not control routers need the ability in a > dynamic host configuration mechanism to assign a number of parameters to the > hosts they administer through that dynamic configuration mechanism. These > parameters include, but, are not limited to: > > 1. Default Router > 2. DNS Resolver information > 3. Host can provide name to server so server can supply dynamic > DNS update > 4. IP Address(es) (v4, v6, possibly multiple v6 in the case of > things like Shim6, etc.) > 5. NTP servers > 6. Boot server > 7. Site specific attribute/value pairs (ala DHCPv4 Options) > > These assignments MUST be controlled by a server and not by the router > because the router is outside of the administrative control of the Systems > Administrator responsible for the hosts being configured. James R. Cutler james.cut...@consultant.com
