ISC DHCP 3.0.4rc1 is now available!

[David W. Hankins]

On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 10:35:32PM +0200, Joerg Mayer wrote:
> to dissect that exact version - just because it is being used. The
> last time I looked at the code for reference because the 3.0.x
> implementation isn't exaclty one of the drafts. That's why I asked
> about documentation this time :-) So if you say that yes, in the
> beginnign phase of 3.1.x the protocol may still be in flux, then I will
> wait for a while longer.

Well, by the time 3.1.0 is a Release Candidate, it's my hope there would
be no flux.  In beta, however (we're not even in what I'd call alpha),
it's quite possible we'll catch errors.

For the time being, there's going to be some flux because I know of a
few things we need to iron out before we ship source (lest we have A
Problem (tm) later in life).

> One thing though: Is there a way to differentiate between the two
> versions or do I need to make this a configure option for the user to
> manually select which implementation of the failover protocol they are
> looking at?

That's the second problem I'm envisioning.  Because we're changing all
the message numbers, I think it's impossible to tell which version you're
looking at unless you got the initial message exchange (and assumed the
servers were both working properly and sending only CONNECT/CONNECTACK
messages at startup).  You'd be able to use the wire protocol number
for those messages to determine which implementation you were looking
at, but this only works when you know what message one side or the
other MEANT to send...and I think that's only the case for these first
two messages.

Perhaps you could do both, default to the more prevalent (failover-7),
and switch to the newer one if you happen to see that initial message
exchange.  Should the newer one get more prevalent, you could make it
the default.

-- 
David W. Hankins		"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer			you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		-- Jack T. Hankins