On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 06:48:46PM +1000, Richard Pruss wrote: > The discussion of DHCP is appropriate for access control really comes > down to a questions of if DHCP configures the network or just the > host. In current practice we do use DHCP to configure both as we want > the network to enforce the configuration done to the client.
I once met a man who wrote some software that implemented an IPv4 tunnel over, of all things, DNS. I don't really think that observation is worth redefining our idea of DNS' place in the network to include "layer 2 framing" and then embark upon severe protocol alterations to improve upon it. Maybe you wouldn't agree. But for the same reason, I'm not really obliged to see a use of the DHCP host configuration channel to configure relay agents - a function that it was not designed to perform, and also that it happens to perform fairly poorly - as being justification to redefine our idea of DHCP's role in IP networks. Just so we can then embark upon core rewrites of client functionality to support it. Sidehacks are great, I think it's wonderful that you've been able to use a tool that was not designed for the purpose you've bent it to, one that many others have used as well. But sidehacks don't make the best standards. -- David W. Hankins "If you don't do it right the first time, Software Engineer you'll just have to do it again." Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. -- Jack T. Hankins
pgphakVBfRRNE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
