RE: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only?

Given what we have, leases flow to the primary, as they get assigned.

What you propose would allow the primary to reclaim some of the un-used
backup
pool during normal operation.

I believe the current protocol already allows for this during
synchronization.
After the primary received all updates from the secondary, it can safely set
the status of any "backup" lease to "free", because the backup is not
running
until the synchronization is complete.

All said, what you propose is useful and worth doing.

/sg

-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Lemon [mailto:mellon@nominum.com]
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 5:32 PM
To: steve@relicore.com
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only?

> Leases should belong to either the primary or the backup,
> regardless of their status ( free, active, abandoned...).
>
> This would be conceptually much cleaner.

Good heavens, that wasn't what I was proposing at all.   That would require
a complete rewrite of the spec, which is out of the question.   I'm just
asking for the restriction that only the secondary can send poolreq, and
the primary send poolresp, be removed.

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