dhcpcd-discuss

On Wednesday, October 22, 2014 2:02 AM, Roy Marples wrote:
> On 21/10/2014 20:45, David Hauck wrote:
>>> From the case where the user expects a working DHCP lease it's
>>> wrong because his network probably won't function with IPv4LL.
>>> From the use case where IPv4LL actually works as designed on the
>>> network then DHCP isn't needed.
>>> 
>>> You know after working this for more years than I care to remember
>>> I really don't know which of the two above is better. I'm probably
>>> leaning slightly to your view.
>> 
>> OK, no problem, it certainly is good to get your feedback on this
>> since
> you've had years of experience with DHCP :). My experience as an
> engineer in this domain is only as a user (administrator) so my
> ponderings do have this slant. Have said this it's surprising to me that
> there isn't better guidance on something like this (which is a situation
> that can certainly occur in practice). Maybe worthwhile at some point to
> see what other clients do in these situations...
> 
> I succumbed.

;) OK. 

I wonder if this behaviour should be configurable? Also, I haven't considered IPv6 in this discussion - I have no idea whether any of this behaviour translates. Finally, can I assume you'll wrap this round of IPV4LL changes into a new release once you've completed your testing?

And, of course, thanks for helping to work through all of this with me.

Cheers,
-David
 
> http://roy.marples.name/projects/dhcpcd/ci/92d07f433c2053cd331df4773b0
> 2348f39d24546?sbs=0
> 
> Roy