Peter Memishian wrote:
> > > I agree administrators may be surprised by this, and if we (actually, the
> > > guys we contracted to do the original work in 2.6) had to do it over
> again
> > > maybe it would be done differently. But I'm not trying to redesign that
> > > architecture, I'm just using it as a guide to keep the overall behavior
> of
> > > the DHCP client consistent. To me, it's consistent to have the DHCP
> > > client watch over the parameters that it is documented to configure.
> >
> > Just wondering, how will NWAM play here? Will the sys admin
> > have more or less say on how the system (currently dhcpagent)
> > manages DHCP?
>
> I don't quite see how NWAM would be involved here. Could you provide an
> example?
Your comment above is on keeping the current architecture
consistent. Now that NWAM introduces a new method of automatic
network configuration, does it make sense to re-think what you
wrote above? The answer can be a simple no, the DHCP architecture
is set in stone so we'd better not touch it. I was just wondering
if NWAM can help reduce the "surprise" of sys admin you wrote
above.
--
K. Poon.
kacheong.poon at sun.com
