|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:25:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Mohacsi Janos <mohacsi@niif.hu> To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com In-Reply-To: <20091022103041.GB32008@vacation.karoshi.com.> Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 09:20:11PM +1100, Karl Auer wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 11:40 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: >>> If, on the other hand, the REAL desire is to have a DHCP server break >>> the tie in the selection between several routers that advertise their >>> presence, that wouldn't be unreasonable. >> >> The RA contains a preference level... maybe that doesn't cut it if >> multiple routers are sending the same preference level, but presumably >> that would not happen in a well-tended network. > > I point you to a fairly common Internet architecture artifact, > the exchange point... dozens of routers sharing a common > media for peering exchange. And you want to use router advertisments for assigning addresses for them? Huh! Regards, Janos
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |