On 14/11/12 16:24, Jim Gettys wrote:
> Please, let's not OD on DHCP in this thread: while I was making a point
> about DHCP, I was really making a more general point about robustness in
> homenet, and how to judge various proposals, more than specifically
> attacking recursive DHCP-PD as a concept.
Please, let's not OD on DHCP in this thread: while I was making a point
about DHCP, I was really making a more general point about robustness in
homenet, and how to judge various proposals, more than specifically
attacking recursive DHCP-PD as a concept.
Similarly, I think as another goal we have
On 14/11/12 12:08, Teco Boot wrote:
>
>> The one-and-only DHCP server knows about all the prefixes delegated
>> from the ISP and the relays know which particular prefix has been
>> given to the local router by the routing protocol or AHCP.
> I don't like a single DHCP server for multi-homed sites
Op 13 nov. 2012, om 21:19 heeft Simon Kelley het volgende geschreven:
> On 13/11/12 19:04, Jim Gettys wrote:
>
>>
>> So the recursive DHCP-PD scheme strikes me as something possibly very
>> fragile. I really, really don't want to repeat the experience I had with
>> having extra DHCP servers, an
On Nov 13, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:
> So the recursive DHCP-PD scheme strikes me as something possibly very
> fragile. I really, really don't want to repeat the experience I had with
> having extra DHCP servers, and I would guess few ISP's do either.
It seems to me that using bad imp
On 13/11/12 20:48, Victor Kuarsingh wrote:
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Simon Kelleywrote:
Given that hosts are going to want to talk RA or DHCPv6, at least
initially, one option down this route has the flood include the unicast
address of a single, centralised DHCPv6 server, and routers r
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Simon Kelley wrote:
> On 13/11/12 19:04, Jim Gettys wrote:
>
>
>> So the recursive DHCP-PD scheme strikes me as something possibly very
>> fragile. I really, really don't want to repeat the experience I had with
>> having extra DHCP servers, and I would guess few I
On 13/11/12 19:04, Jim Gettys wrote:
So the recursive DHCP-PD scheme strikes me as something possibly very
fragile. I really, really don't want to repeat the experience I had with
having extra DHCP servers, and I would guess few ISP's do either.
It seems to me much more robust to flood the key
I've been watching the discussion about recursive DHCPv6-PD with more than
a little discomfort; I did not want to throw this bomb until the issue had
been discussed in depth (as prefix delegation is a problem we must solve).
The hardest problem I've ever had to debug in my home network (by far) wa
