host-identifier with IPv6

[Frank Bulk]

You've just pointed one of the problems of the standards development process
-- standards are written that don't match operational specifics, and so
those who actually *do* the work are trying to force-fit the tools they have
to solve real needs.  Vendors are stuck somewhere in-between -- meeting the
real (revenue-generating) needs of their customers while stating that they
support standards (which may fall short of fully serving their customers).  

Rather than trying to defend the RFCs (or point to the status quo) and
minimize the processes that network admins use with IPv4 today, perhaps Ted
can use his standards process and and software development knowledge to
write a draft that addresses the problems that network admins in this forum
are facing.  I'm sure those participating in this thread would be glad to
add their comments.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: dhcp-users-bounces at lists.isc.org
[mailto:dhcp-users-bounces at lists.isc.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon
Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 1:17 PM
To: Users of ISC DHCP
Subject: Re: host-identifier with IPv6

On Mar 3, 2009, at 3:18 AM, Simon Hobson wrote:
> Sorry, but this comes across as "we don't care if the protocol
> doesn't work for some important real world setups - that's your fault
> for having the audacity to work around practical issues".

I think this is really the heart of this discussion.   Ultimately, you
feel that the wrong decision was made.   So I'm trying to offer
constructive suggestions for how to deal with things as they are, and
you're telling me they shouldn't be that way.   This is the wrong time
for that.   You were here when the IETF was designing this protocol.
I think I was still supporting the ISC server when I wrote the section
of the draft you're complaining about.   Maybe I should have tried
specifically to include you, but you were not intentionally left out.

The IETF is an open organization.   Not only do we welcome the
participation of network operators, but there are entire working
groups dedicated to addressing their concerns, and they are as
important as, if not more important than, the protocol extension
working groups.   For instance, at the upcoming IETF in San Francisco,
DNSOP (the DNS operations working group) is meeting, but DNSEXT (the
DNS protocol working group) is not.   Furthermore, the reason I
continue to read this mailing list, despite the fact that I no longer
work for the ISC nor support ISC products, is that I think it's
important in my role as an IETF protocol/operations wonk.

So now you have the protocol you have.   This protocol is widely
implemented - it's included in Vista, ISC has an implementation, Cisco
has several implementations, Nominum has an implementation, I have a
client I've written.   And I've explained to you how to shoehorn your
needs into the protocol you have.   But you keep coming back and
telling me that the spec is wrong.  Worse, you're proposing a change
that would create a huge interoperability problem.

So I'm asking you to take a deep breath, stop feeling like you were
left out of this process, and deal with the situation as it is
today.   I've made some suggestions for how to deal with this that I'm
pretty sure will work in practice.   Software is available today that
supports what I've suggested.   I think it will work.   If it won't
work, fine, come back and let us know.   I'm not sure what we'll do in
that case, but at least we won't be speculating about something that
*might* be a problem.

Speaking as an author of a client, I've found this conversation
instructive, and I will certainly be making code changes to account
for what's been discussed here.   I don't know if other client
implementors are paying attention to this discussion (I'm sure the ISC
guys are!), but hopefully all of this talk hasn't been in vain.   But
I don't think we're making progress, so I'm going to propose that we
table it now (although if you want to respond with some incisive
rejoinders, I won't take it the wrong way).

_______________________________________________
dhcp-users mailing list
dhcp-users at lists.isc.org
https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcp-users