Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NTP) Optionsfor DHCPv6

Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews@isc.org> Mon, 26 November 2007 00:09 UTC

Return-path: <dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IwRXJ-0004TN-9f; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:09:17 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IwRXI-0004TH-JD for dhcwg@ietf.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:09:16 -0500
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org ([2001:470:1f00:820:214:22ff:fed9:fbdc]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IwRXG-0003Pb-49 for dhcwg@ietf.org; Sun, 25 Nov 2007 19:09:16 -0500
Received: from drugs.dv.isc.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by drugs.dv.isc.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id lAQ092va059077; Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:09:02 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from marka@drugs.dv.isc.org)
Message-Id: <200711260009.lAQ092va059077@drugs.dv.isc.org>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
From: Mark Andrews <Mark_Andrews@isc.org>
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NTP) Optionsfor DHCPv6
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 25 Nov 2007 17:30:52 MDT." <3D222556-27E9-4EFA-87E0-A43A3C5E9E16@fugue.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:09:02 +1100
X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-)
X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2
Cc: ntpwg@lists.ntp.org, Brian Utterback <brian.utterback@sun.com>, "Richard Gayraud (rgayraud)" <rgayraud@cisco.com>, dhcwg@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: dhcwg.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dhcwg-bounces@ietf.org

> On Nov 25, 2007, at 3:24 PM, Brian Utterback wrote:
> > If a client is served an IP address at start up time, it has no  
> > choice but to use that address for the
> > entire time it is up and running.
> 
> This is simply not true.   The client would get the currently- 
> configured NTP server IP address every time it renews its lease.    
> It's true that some NTP clients may not bother to check their  
> configuration information for updates, but it is not true that they  
> have no choice - checking for configuration updates is trivial.
> 
> Indeed, I would say that at this late date, a network service that  
> gets its configuration information from the DHCP client, but does not  
> follow updates to that information, is broken.  Information provided  
> by the local DHCP server will most likely change when the client moves  
> from network to network.   The information that worked on one network  
> may not work at all on another.   This is true whether the information  
> is a domain name or an IP address.

I would think that this should be a push operation from the dhcp
client rather than a pull operation.  A trivial push would be for
the DHCP client to re-start the NTP client on address change (NTP
server and optionally lease address change).

I already do the later as the NTP client doesn't notice lease address
changes.

Mark
-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742                 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@isc.org

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