On Apr 15, 2014, at 12:29 PM, Philip Homburg <pch-homene...@u-1.phicoh.com> wrote: > You really think people are going to rewrite Linux network config for some > weird edge case?
People are rewriting Linux the network configuration system as we speak. This particular edge case is just one example of why it's broken. So yes, I agree that if this were the only reason to do the work, it would never happen, but since it's happening already, I think that's moot. > I'm only saying that from my perspective, changing DHCPv4 is the best > technical solution. Right, but you haven't given a technical argument to support that. You've just said that it's convenient in a particular existing implementation, which is not in wide use, and which is already undergoing changes that will coincidentally make addressing this less inconvenient. So this isn't a good argument. > So my guess is that staying on the RA/DHCPv6 route will just seriously > delay the implementation of this option. On Linux. If neither systemd nor dnsmasq nor one of their replacements actually becomes popular (although dnsmasq is already popular in embedded environments). I agree with this, if you accept the caveats I just added, but I don't think it's a big problem. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
