Sorry I haven't replied. I called on colleagues who knew the context
better for help, but first vacation and now, pressure to complete other
drafts has prevented them from giving any attention to this. Until the
use case becomes clearer I guess I'll let it rest.
Tom Taylor
On 30/09/2013 5:38 PM, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Sep 27, 2013, at 1:12 PM, Tom Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
No I have no intention of seeking another meeting slot for this little
document. But I do ask whether people can approve it in principle, so we can
put through the necessary Standards Action to get the DHCP/DHCPv6 options in
place.
Again, this is about DHCP options to tell a router where to find two management
entities, the SYSLOG Collector and the SNMP Notification Receiver, for use
primarily in configuring mobile backhaul.
<no hats>
I must admit to being a little confused by this draft / the use case.
The draft says:
"The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4 [RFC2131] and DHCPv6
[RFC3315]) is a relevant tool for this purpose. It provides a number
of existing options to allow a node to acquire its configuration file
and to locate key servers in the network. "
Presumably the node connects to $something and downloads a (node specific)
config file -- why is the SYSLOG and SNMP devices not simply defined in the
config file?
Or, is the intent that the nodes will all download the *same* config file, and
then use DHCP options to provide the node specific bits?
If the latter, is [DNS, Hostname, SYSLOG, SNMP] the only things that differ
between nodes? What about interface names / addresses / ssh keys / etc?
I'm so not a mobile operator, so maybe I'm just not understanding what sorts of
things these nodes do and so what sort of node specific config they need.
I'm not disagreeing with the concept, I'm more intrigued…
</no hats>
W
...
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
