Subject: [dhcwg] Use of FQDN vs IP address

From: "MORAND Lionel RD-CORE-ISS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:35:07 +0100

During the dhc WG session, there was a couple of discussions about the
use of FQDNs in dhcp options to provide information to a dhcp client.
We can all agree on the fact that using IP@ instead of FQDN makes life
easier. However, if we can recommend to use IP@, should we forbid
someone to use FQDN if possible?

I'm not an expert on dhcp or dns but I think that this kind of choice
depends on how you want to configure your network. And if someone sees
some advantages to rely on DNS administration instead of dhcp
configuration when possible, is there any dhcp implementaton issue to
use FQDN based options, except maybe concerns about the total length of
the dhcp messages?

For the dhc-paa-option draft in particular, I repeat that there is no
reason to mandate one or the other method from a pana specification
standpoint. The requirement is just to be able to use DHCP to locate
PANA agent, whatever the way to finally get the agent's IP@ (IP@
retrieved from the DHCP or using DNS resolution). After it's a matter of
network configuration.

BR,

Lionel

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg