Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<uv5doe$q7om$4@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: I never thought of this scenario Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 07:05:50 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 12 Message-ID: <uv5doe$q7om$4@dont-email.me> References: <uutq04$2n9pt$1@dont-email.me> <07WdnchvLrr2GI_7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> <uuu39t$2pd0s$1@dont-email.me> <uuvblp$32mbm$1@dont-email.me> <uuve5k$6pq$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> <uuvf2e$33bqs$1@dont-email.me> <uuvhp6$g0s$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> <uuvij0$340q8$2@dont-email.me> <uuvl9j$uaf$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> <uv0017$3ajd1$1@dont-email.me> <uv1ucj$sti$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> <uv2e9m$jin$2@dont-email.me> <uv2g3g$39k$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> <uv320m$4tr5$1@dont-email.me> <uv4jd3$mj2$2@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 07:05:50 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7ce03bb5457ab82bf7e463e8fecedba8"; logging-data="859926"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Vwbe6hKnX0QuYnLXwel4u" User-Agent: Pan/0.155 (Kherson; fc5a80b8) Cancel-Lock: sha1:14sdbTolbCxcBFW77sT3lBdL+zI= Bytes: 1864 On Tue, 9 Apr 2024 18:36:03 -0500, Grant Taylor wrote: > On 4/9/24 04:33, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> If DHCP were routable, you wouldn’t need “relay agents”. > > DHCP is routable. > > Not all uses of DHCP are routable. What is the point of adding something to make those non-routable uses routable, if the protocol is already supposed to be routable?