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

Roop Mukherjee <bmukherj@shoshin.uwaterloo.ca> Wed, 17 July 2002 13:40 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 JAA16226 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:40:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id JAA09789 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:41:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA09500; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:36:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA09433 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:35:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from styx.uwaterloo.ca (styx.uwaterloo.ca [129.97.105.10]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA16108 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:34:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (bmukherj@localhost) by styx.uwaterloo.ca (8.11.6/8.11.0) with ESMTP id g6HDXvn02969; Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:33:57 -0400
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2002 09:33:57 -0400
From: Roop Mukherjee <bmukherj@shoshin.uwaterloo.ca>
To: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
cc: Roop Mukherjee <bmukherj@shoshin.uwaterloo.ca>, Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>, DHCP discussion list <dhcwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Review of Service-Discovery-Type options in DHCP
In-Reply-To: <2F7FCD64-9946-11D6-8431-00039317663C@nominum.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0207170910050.2571-100000@styx.uwaterloo.ca>
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

Not using imperatives, does not imply that the text expresses opinion.

Let me try to make it simple. The technical point I was trying to make 
was:
Distinguish between the configuration probelm from the naming problem. 

The naming problem is that of finding the address of an entity in the 
network. If there is a name server, like DNS, then nodes can querry it for 
names without having any other association with it. This is important 
becuae one may have non-DHCP hosts wanting to discover names. 
 
The configuration problem is finding your own address, and that 
of some other essential entities. Insisting that the general naming 
function be performed as part of the configuration(DHCP) server is just 
globbing functionality together.

As the internet grows, the naimg problem will likely need something better 
than DNS. At the least keeping it disinct from other problems will help.

Cheers,
-- Roop
______________________________________________
On Wed, 17 Jul 2002, Ted Lemon wrote:

> > It seems that the problem of service discovery, probably better termed as
> > server discovery, at the moment is simply that of locating a server for a
> > service that a end-node may desire. Locating the address of a server (for
> > time, ftp etc.) is a naming function.
> >
> > That being the case, locating the names of servers seems more up the alley
> > of DNS than DHCP.
> 
> This seems to be a statement of opinion.   I was looking more for logical 
> arguments - that is, you present *reasons* why you believe that DNS is a 
> better choice than DHCP.   I don't see any reasons here - just opinions.
> 
> I am not saying you are definitely wrong.  I just don't see how this 
> statement helps us to decide what to do.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dhcwg mailing list
> dhcwg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
> 




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