Ted Lemon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jul 4, 2013, at 11:42 AM, mike <[email protected]> wrote: >> As far as I can tell now, it would just be a race in the multihoming >> situation, right? Pretty much whichever DHCP server responded first >> (or their relay) would win which could cause some inconsistency for >> configuration that is "shared". DNS, for example, might give different >> results if, say, one of my upstream providers answered queries >> differently than another because one has, say, a service to do split >> horizon DNS to fake up names for my home and the other doesn't. Or if >> you hate that example, there have got to be dozens of others in the >> kitchen sink of DHCP options.
> Work is being done on this in the MIF working group at the moment; we
> believe the problem is tractable. To future-proof against work that
> has not yet completed there, the right thing for homenet to do is make
> sure that the information is tagged as to its source, and not just
> dumped into a pot and mixed together.
To the extent that one sees two DHCP servers because one has two interfaces,
MIF has some solutions.
Simply looking at Figure 2 of arch-08, one sees that each hosts can see two
DHCP servers on the two CERs, and none of the hosts has multiple interfaces.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
pgpqwVdPDET2A.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
