Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:34:08 +0200
From:      David DEMELIER <demelier.david@gmail.com>
To:        Marcin Cieslak <saper@saper.info>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: DHCP server in base
Message-ID:  <AANLkTinPMJiMV9ZkSMpu=tBancDV-=myv4P5ckUrZUk4@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <slrni9sp90.22ac.saper@saper.info>
References:  <20100910234830.87641e07.ray@ddteam.net> <4C8ACE52.8060000@FreeBSD.org> <AANLkTinkJ182=GFTdWW_0OAT6rfoRJPBxnzMyukCeYnR@mail.gmail.com> <20100915.082513.802140508206832836.imp@bsdimp.com> <slrni9sp90.22ac.saper@saper.info>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/9/25 Marcin Cieslak <saper@saper.info>:
>>> M. Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> wrote:
>
>>: I agree but like Aleksandr said, almost 70% of dhcp code is already in
>>: base so adding 1Mb of dhcpd code wouldn't be too much. I like the idea
>>: to keep some parts in the ports tree and move out from the base.
>>
>> Yea. =C2=A0I agree too. =C2=A0Just because BIND was EOLd in 6 isn't a gr=
eat
>> argument against dhcp server. =C2=A0Most of the code is there anyway, an=
d
>> it isn't evolving as fast as BIND.
>>
>> It would be very convenient to have this particular thing in the base,
>> and we shouldn't be too dogmatic about never having any new 3rd party
>> things in the base. =C2=A0After all, we just added more compression
>> utilities to the base, and nobody said a peep. =C2=A0This is analogous: =
we
>> have good opportunity to integrate into the system, and users benefit
>> from that integration.
>
> As a road-warrior consultant I really value having things like
> bootpd, tftpd, bootparamd and similar software always there.
> Many times I wished dhcpd was there, too.
>
> Another typical use - FreeBSD makes a good small network router out
> of the box (PPP, NAT, ipfw, WLAN AP, DNS are there, dhcpd - missing).
>
> I am not sure about the whole "modularization" goal - I think
> the relatively monolythic nature is one of the FreeBSD's merits.
>
> For example, it's good to have NFSv4, Kerberos and required
> userland daemons packaged in the base. I don't want to have
> those done separately in a modular way (although Heimdal
> we have is older then what their current trunk is).
> We got stuck on connecting Linux boxes via NFSv4 to Solaris
> and BSD because one of the userland modules in Linux was terribly
> out of date and authenticating the user w/Kerberos was not possible.
>
> As we build a more complex networking landscape with VIMAGE and
> friends I think that the benefits of better integration of dhcpd
> in the base system (rc.d, rc.conf...) may outweigh its costs
> (maintenance, bloat, etc.).
>
> //Marcin
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org=
"
>

I agree that for some people it will be completely useless, but if we
can disable it in src.conf everyone will be happy. Since FreeBSD is
great for a router it's really fast to make a full working server
without installing anything else.

I agree for the 70% part of dhcp which is already present.

In any case, src.conf(5) is still working and usable, isn't it?

Kind regards,

--=20
Demelier David



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTinPMJiMV9ZkSMpu=tBancDV-=myv4P5ckUrZUk4>