Re: [dhcwg] Anyone interested in continuing draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt?

[Sten Carlsen <[e-mail]>]

On 22/08/13 14:14, Ole Troan wrote:
>>> I may easily be wrong here but snooping sounds to me like a stop gap
>>> solution i.e. what you do when no better method is available?
>>>
>>> Seen from outside (my chair) it looks like there might be a need for a
>>> protocol to talk directly with the switch/router, possibly first passing
>>> a control/admin system that controls what may be set up in various
>>> places in the network.
>> Sounds as if a combination of DHCP and another protocol be needed whenever DHCP PD is deployed in a DHCP Relay topology.
>>
>> But something that describes the problem could indeed be written.
> like:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-stenberg-pd-route-maintenance-00
Something like this, though I may not agree to all the conclusions,
maybe because I don't run a large network.

One thing you do not mention here is the situation where one unit fails
(maybe because of an axe from an angry user) and must be replaced.
Mostly automatic reconfiguration seems a good thing in that situation.
>
> ?
>
> cheers,
> Ole
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

-- 
Best regards

Sten Carlsen

No improvements come from shouting:

       "MALE BOVINE MANURE!!!"