Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Review of Service-Discovery-Type options in DHCP

From: Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 05:01:22 -0700

>What you propose is perfectly workable, but I don't
>see how it's *better* than what DHCP already provides.

My belief is that one of the benefits of IPv6 is that it does automatic 
address allocation without needing a DHCP server. This is good. This 
means that your network operations people have one less server to install 
and configure and maintain.

If we make our IPv6 hosts dependent on DHCPv6 servers for lots of 
critical information that they cannot operate without, then we still need 
to run a DHCP server and we have lost that IPv6 benefit.

Since (a) hosts still need to find out information like "Where's my time 
server", and (b) in an all-IPv6 world we still plan to run DNS servers 
anyway, then if we can put information (a) into DNS (b), we can eliminate 
the burden of also having to install and configure and maintain a DHCP 
server. Instead of having to communicate arbitrary bootstrap 
configuration information to hosts, we now just have to communicate the 
name server address(es) and the default domain, which is a nice simple 
constrained problem that can be solved in any number of simple ways -- 
e.g. add that information to Router Advertisement packets.

[Of course, I am well aware that this point of view will not be popular 
with all the people working so hard for so long on DHCPv6. Also, if you 
have a company that sells a DHCP server, then eliminating the need for 
DHCP servers is not in your company's best interest. I understand that.]

Stuart Cheshire <[email-masked]>
 * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer
 * Chairman, IETF ZEROCONF
 * www.stuartcheshire.org

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

---

From: Jitesh N Verma <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 18:19:24 +0530 (IST)

Hi,
	What do you mean by one less server to maintain? Do you recommend a
single server daemon for all the services (dhcpd,bind,ftpd,telnetd,ntpd...).

There are several OS companies who supplys DNS and DHCP both to their
customers. So, the other point also is not valid.

Cheers,
Jitesh

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    ~                                                             ~
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
^ Jitesh N. Verma                     Tel. 91-80-225 1554 Ext. 1424   ^
^ HEWLETT PACKARD                     Fax. 91-80-220 0196             ^
^ INDIA SOFTWARE OPERATIONS         Email. [email-masked]        ^
^ 29, CUNNINGHAM ROAD               Pager. 9624-263608                ^
^ BANGALORE 560 052        __      Telnet. 847-1424                   ^
^                         / /                                         ^
^                        / /___ _____                                 ^
^                       / __  // __  /                                ^
^                      / / / // /_/ /                                 ^
^                     /_/ /_// ____/                                  ^
^                           / /                                       ^
^                          /_/                                        ^
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*

---

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 10:29:29 +0900

Stuart, let's be careful here.   My motivation for being involved in DHCPv6 
is that I think people will want it.   IPv6 provides a completely 
functional alternative to DHCPv6, so the _only_ reason that DHCPv6 will 
ever be deployed is if people want it.   The idea that you want fewer 
network servers strikes me as a red herring - if you have the right 
administrative interface, it doesn't *matter* how many ports you are 
listening on, or what format the packets have.   The impact on the end user 
is the same - hopefully nil, or nearly nil.

I can tell you quite frankly that although I am quite skeptical that DHCP 
is going to go away with IPv6, I would be very happy to get out of the DHCP 
business and hack on DNS or something else.   And I think that whichever 
way the market goes, my company is going to do fine, so I'm not worried 
about it from that perspective.

So let's not make this a discussion about which way is better.  Let's let 
the market determine that.   Let's instead figure out how we can win 
whichever way the market goes.