IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6

John Schnizlein <jschnizl@cisco.com> Wed, 23 January 2002 19:18 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA21290 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:18:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id OAA12870 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:18:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA11693; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:57:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA11669 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:57:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from wells.cisco.com (wells.cisco.com [171.71.177.223]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA20587 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:57:26 -0500 (EST)
Received: from JSCHNIZL-W2K1.cisco.com (rtp-vpn1-241.cisco.com [10.82.224.241]) by wells.cisco.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_14041)/CISCO.SERVER.1.2) with ESMTP id KAA10281; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:56:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020123135018.019cf5c8@diablo.cisco.com>
X-Sender: jschnizl@diablo.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 13:55:42 -0500
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>
From: John Schnizlein <jschnizl@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Options in base doc for DHCPv6
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20020123115503.00b984b0@funnel.cisco.com>
References: <5890000.1011774024@elgar> <4.3.2.7.2.20020122144616.036c6a28@funnel.cisco.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020122144616.036c6a28@funnel.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org

At 11:57 AM 1/23/2002, Ralph Droms wrote:
>I propose we move Domain Search Option and 
>Domain Name Server Option out of the base DHCPv6 spec, as well...

I think you just threw the baby out with the bath water.
How is the host supposed to find a Domain Name Server?
Without DNS lookups, how can the host find SVR records?

The security issues with Domain Search justify putting it off,
but we should keep DNS in the base spec.

John


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email