Ralph,

It was brilliant to re-discover what dhcp can do for IPv6.  This will
also work with router renumbering very well in the real market.

/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Droms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2002 1:54 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: PPP and Global Addresses
> 
> 
> I have to ask - because I've never heard it raised as an issue outside
> this mailing list - has anyone ever heard a *network administrator* or
> other customer of IETF protocols say that "configuring 
> routers with what
> is titled a host specific protocol will create more confusion than it
> is worth."
> 
> If the name is truly a problem, I'm happy to follow up on the 
> suggestion
> that we rename DHCP to "Dynamic Node Configuration Protocol" 
> or "Dynamic
> Site Configuration Protocol" or "Yet Another Configuration 
> Protocol".  I'm
> having a hard time believing we're making technical decisions about
> protocol design based on the *name* of the protocols involved.
> 
> Sheesh.
> 
> BTW, just to review some ancient history, I added the 
> infamous sentence
> "DHCP is not intended for use in configuring routers." (originally in
> RFC1531 and carried forward to RFC1541 and RFC2131) to limit 
> the scope of
> the problem we were trying to solve.  That was (literally) 10 
> years ago.
> Maybe it's OK now to reconsider that constraint.
> 
> The sentence is *not* included in draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-23.txt.
> 
> - Ralph
> 
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2002, Pekka Savola wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, Tony Hain wrote:
> > > Ole Troan wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > would you be happier if we renamed it to SNCP (Simple Node
> > > > Configuration Protocol)? :-)
> > >
> > > Actually, yes. Routers are not hosts, so configuring 
> routers with what
> > > is titled a host specific protocol will create more 
> confusion than it is
> > > worth.
> >
> > Just a point: the value of router/host toggle is 
> interface-specific.  This
> > was dicussed, hmm, probably around 6-9 months ago here in 
> the context of
> > RFC2461.
> >
> > I also think DHCP and what not should not be used for router
> > configuration.
> >
> >
> > > > for me this boils down to picking a packet format on 
> the wire. DHCP
> > > > offers a more flexible option format, is more extensible, has a
> > > > defined relay mechanism, offers a Reconfigure mechanism so it is
> > > > possible to poke the requesting router.  I have no 
> problem with using
> > > > ICMP PD, my point is that as we move along it is going 
> to look awfully
> > > > much like DHCP.
> > >
> > > If we are going to need a stateful protocol tied to an 
> authentication
> > > system, using the wire format and option richness of a 
> widely deployed
> > > protocol makes more sense than inventing a new one. At 
> the same time,
> > > going that route requires a serious look at the defined 
> options to find
> > > any potential security holes that may exist because there was a
> > > historical assumption that the option applied to an end 
> system not a
> > > router. If a router requesting one of the existing 
> options opens a big
> > > hole, we really do need a new protocol.
> > >
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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]
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> >
> > --
> > 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]
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to