<hat wg-co-chair=off just-another-bozo-on-this-bus=on> At Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:05:35 -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote: > > From my point of view, the problem with mandating the use of either of > these solutions is that they would both introduce the use of mandatory > proxies to some extent, and would prevent the application-layer DNS from > working in their absence. This is a bad idea, in my opinion, as it > interferes with several basic design tenets.
One can chose to co-locate a DHCP-lite server with the DNS name server, at which point DHCP is no longer a proxy by the definition you appear to be using. There's still some involvment by the router in everything but the single subnet case, but that's unavoidable (in kind, anyway -- one can argue about the degree of router involvement). </hat> #---------------------------------------------------------------------- # To unsubscribe, send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
