On Thu, 6 Mar 2003, Bill Manning wrote: > % On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Bill Manning wrote: > % > As a co-author of a couple of previous DNS discovery IDs, I would > % > have to agree that as postulated, the current DNS discovery work > % > has pretty much been OBE. (overtaken by events) > % > There have been two distinct BOFs on this idea in the last five years > % > so I don't think another BOF will be very productive. > % > % I assume those BOFs were for IPv4? > > No, they were for DNS discovery. Protocol agnostic.
That avoids the question (which I hoped was clear, but perhaps not). If you have to run DHCPv4 in any case to get an IPv4 address to be able to use the net, I'm certain nothing could come of such a BOF. > > % As I see it, DNS discovery can either be: > % > % 1) "all that you need" > % 2) "the first step" > > Both points were covered each time. And each time, the result > was that DNS discovery should be limited to point #1. Good. > Point #2 is covered under the DHCP work and should not > be replicated. Ok, but one argument is that DHCP is too address-assignment -specific. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
