Jan Damborsky wrote:
> Hi Darren,
>  
>>> * user would need to remember appropriate services & SMF properties 
>>> to configure
>>>   particular things which might not be considered as user friendly. 
>>> Also, since some
>>>   of those properties will be private to the installer, it might not 
>>> be appropriate
>>>   to expose them to the end user.
>>
>> I disagree with the first part of this being a problem.
>>
>> On the one hand, you can use exisiting names for service and properties,
>> thereby allowing any existing property to be configured and on the 
>> other,
>> you need to create a whole new namespace and make sure that you can
>> correctly map a name in it to the correct service and property.
>
> I can see your point about disadvantage of creating separate namespace
> for sysconfig properties.
> I don't see translation process itself as a big deal though, since it 
> would remain
> hidden from user point of view.

 From the users' view, yes.

But consider what the cost will be in terms of the ongoing developer
maintenaince.


>>> * Support for dynamic/derived manifests might not be possible on client
>>>   side. For instance, some network parameters might be dynamically
>>>   determined by client - e.g.
>>>   - NIC name set to name of boot NIC
>>>   - static IP set to the one obtained from DHCP, ...
>>
>> As far as I know, we currently do not do the latter.
>
> To be honest, I am not sure how common it might be. I have heard
> from people that in some cases they create DHCP entries with static
> IP assignments (IP bound to particular MAC) even for machines with
> static IP.

Ah, what you're referring to is the practice of people assigning
specific addresses in a pool to a machine staticly with DHCP
and then configuring the machine using a static configuration.

The reason is simple: this is how people reserve addresses for
specific purposes when all address assignment comes from a
single pool of (DHCP) addresses.

The reason for not using DHCP in the configuration could be
one of many things, including policy, maintainability, reliability
or performance.

Darren

Reply via email to