Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 09:28:49 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: dougb@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: DHCP server in base Message-ID: <20100917.092849.584158775148072316.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <4C91100C.5060502@FreeBSD.org> References: <AANLkTinkJ182=GFTdWW_0OAT6rfoRJPBxnzMyukCeYnR@mail.gmail.com> <20100915.082513.802140508206832836.imp@bsdimp.com> <4C91100C.5060502@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <4C91100C.5060502@FreeBSD.org>
Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> writes:
: > Most of the code is there anyway, and it isn't evolving as fast as
: > BIND.
:
: That is actually a more rational argument, even if I don't agree with
: it. FWIW, part of the reason that I don't agree with it is that at
: some point, hopefully in the near future, we will want to include the
: DHCPv6 client in the mix somewhere; and when we do the code base is
: not going to be as stable as we have enjoyed so far with the v4
: dhclient.
True, but that still won't change the dynamic that adding a dhcp
server is easy give we have most of one already in the tree. Adding
v6 support likely will mean a certain amount of code churn, I'll grant
you that. But the code/api churn that's happening is within a single
program, making it much easier to MFC as necessary to keep up.
: > This is analogous: we
: > have good opportunity to integrate into the system, and users benefit
: > from that integration.
:
: Given your perspective of wanting more of a complete system in the
: base I can certainly see how you would be supportive of this
: change. My intent was to make the argument in a general way that this
: is the wrong direction to go, and that users would benefit *more* from
: a robust modularized system. The fact that the v4 DHCPd might
: accidentally be a good candidate for including in the base today
: doesn't mean that doing so is the right strategy for the long term.
I take a more nuanced view: we have to evaluate each proposed addition
to the system on its merits. One of these criteria is long term
viability, but others include how useful is it to the users; how much
demand will there be; will including it make the project look good?;
will not including it make the project look bad?; etc
We'd all like to see a more modular base, but until that nut is
cracked, we have a balancing act to perform.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100917.092849.584158775148072316.imp>