From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 17 15:12:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71FE316A401 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:12:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joerg@britannica.bec.de) Received: from hydra.bec.de (www.ostsee-abc.de [62.206.222.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08C7343D49 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:12:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from joerg@britannica.bec.de) Received: from britannica.bec.de (unknown [139.30.252.72]) by hydra.bec.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A14D35707 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:12:29 +0100 (CET) Received: by britannica.bec.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 82D256D10D; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:12:20 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:12:20 +0100 From: joerg@britannica.bec.de To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060317151220.GA26987@britannica.bec.de> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org References: <200603171502.k2HF2IV3086523@pinky.frank-behrens.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200603171502.k2HF2IV3086523@pinky.frank-behrens.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Subject: Re: [RFE] dhclient(8) should send hostname X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:12:31 -0000 On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 04:02:17PM +0100, Frank Behrens wrote: > I propose a change, that dhclient sends always the current hostname > to the server, the value can be overwritten in dhclient.conf. I see > no negative impact, because the server has always the possibility to > reject the name and to choose another one. It would simplify the > setup and lead to the same behaviour as in other (operating) systems. > A possible (I'm sure not the best) solution I appended as attachment. I object this, since it is one of the most annoying default behaviours of Windows. It is the first thing I disable on all clients -- I have a static name mapping, why should I update the DNS zone? Quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if the number of zones where the host update request is ignored far outweights the number of configurations where it is wanted. At least Bind sometimes like to whine about it. Joerg