[136341] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: quietly....
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Iljitsch van Beijnum)
Wed Feb 2 11:55:59 2011
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D4982CC.7060100@otd.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 17:55:53 +0100
To: Dave Israel <davei@otd.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2 feb 2011, at 17:14, Dave Israel wrote:
>> I understand people use DHCP for lots of stuff today. But that's =
mainly because DHCP is there, not because it's the best possible way to =
get that particular job done.
> So what if I want to assign different people to different resolvers by =
policy?
For the record: I'm not saying that DHCPv6 is never useful. DHCPv6 is =
intended as a stateful configuration provisioning tool, i.e., to give =
different hosts different configurations. If that's what you need then =
DHCP fits the bill. However, in most small scale environments this is =
not what's needed so DHCP doesn't fit the bill.
Also, the examples mentioned are about enterprise networks with stable =
systems. Here, DHCP works well. However, with systems that connect to =
different networks, things don't always work so well. I may want to use =
the DHCP-provided NTP servers at work, but syncing with a random NTP =
server when I connect to a wifi hotspot is not such a great idea.=
