OT-Re: test post

[Monty J. Harder]

"Gerald Combs" <gerald at ethereal.com>

> I did a little research, and ran across RFC 3203
> (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3203.txt), which was approved earlier this
> month.  It describes the DHCP FORCERENEW message extension, which does
> exactly what Brian is asking for.  Now we just have to wait for it to be
> implemented in the various DHCP servers and clients.  Preferably after
> DHCP auth (RFC 3118) gets implemented.  :)

  This is an obvious next step on the way to IPv6, under which the very
notion of static IP becomes irrelevant for most purposes.  On the one hand,
since the less-significant half of the address is supposed to be unique,
it's about as "static" as it can get.  But on the other hand, the
more-significant "network" portion of the address is in theory always
dynamic (with the exception of the backbone itself), with a very short
"lease" life.  This is supposed to reflect the idea that the network address
incorporates routing information.  It is obviously of the greatest value to
mobile devices, but it's equally possible for the network itself to "move"
while the devices remain geographically stationary.