On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Robert Elz wrote: > It could just be that people believe that the only way to ever configure > a router is manually, and that any protocol to automate the process is > necessarily flawed. If so, I'd like to understand why, but I think I'd > tend to ignore that sentiment - other than to make sure that implementations > keep on making it possible to manually configure, so that people who > believe this don't have the rug yanked out from under them (and in certain > particular circumstances, I think this probably includes all of us).
In my opinion, DHCP was not designed, from the start, to configure routers. Now, as an afterthough, capabilities are added to do just that. My worry is that some of the basic assumptions of DHCP architecture do not necessarily fit well into the new requirements of configuring routers. >From an operational point-of-view, I would not like have automatic configuration mechanisms (apart from, possibly, NTP/DNS/... settings) for the important routers. However, to make renumbering even remotely possible, I don't see a problem, as such, with configuring very simple routers (don't run routing protocols at all, no access-lists or acl's dynamically created, etc.) like DSL/Cable boxes via some mechanism. I think that would only be sensible. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
