[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC 5006 status
Le 19 mars 2010 à 16:06, Syam Madanapalli a écrit :
> On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr> wrote:
>>
>> Le 19 mars 2010 à 15:22, Syam Madanapalli a écrit :
>>> And if you are proposing the RA DHCP option for DNS server address
>>> alone,
>>
>> I am not.
>
> You can put the list here, and the need for these list to be in RAs.
No need for the list.
The proposal is just a generic tool.
It can be used with any existing or future stateless DNS option, existing or to be added.
>> Just the opposite.
>> It is RFC 5006 which has this limitation.
>
> RFC 5006 has been written for a single and specific option.
> You seem to be justifying DHCP into RA based on RFC 5006
> defining DNS Server Address Option, which in my views is
> incorrect.
That's in fact not how things happened.
I had already expressed to Dan Wing, in a previous meeting, my support for DNS options in RAs, not remembering that the original idea was from Suresh Krishnan.
But now that it is discussed that RFC 5006 could become standard track, it's an obvious time to suggest a more generic approach.
RD