Article <uvnf17$1ct1p$2@dont-email.me>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <uvnf17$1ct1p$2@dont-email.me>

Deutsch English Français Italiano

<uvnf17$1ct1p$2@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!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, 17 Apr 2024 03:17:59 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <uvnf17$1ct1p$2@dont-email.me>
References: <uuvl9j$uaf$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net>
	<uv1ucj$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$2@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net>
	<uv5doe$q7om$4@dont-email.me> <uv5f3n$qkhk$1@dont-email.me>
	<uvchq3$2kbfj$3@dont-email.me>
	<uvcmop$75v$1@tncsrv09.home.tnetconsulting.net>
	<uvcu5a$2qdb0$5@dont-email.me> <uvdcrf$6p7v$1@news1.tnib.de>
	<uvhtaq$3th0n$4@dont-email.me> <uvi269$28bn$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2024 05:18:00 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="eab0799947e46f7ee0d29068ff6512f6";
	logging-data="1471545"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18G7cdlAMiluPn/amsnYILi"
User-Agent: Pan/0.155 (Kherson; fc5a80b8)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:56p6kYCnTaFK8V9/fA0RT/TVhc4=
Bytes: 2342

On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 02:08:09 -0000 (UTC), Rich wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> I went through the details of RFC2131 in another posting. Go read it
>> (the RFC and my posting).
> 
> And, yet, you seem to have missed this statement from the RFC:
> 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2131 - page 6:
> 
>         DHCP should not require a server on each subnet.  To allow for
>         scale and economy, DHCP must work across routers or through the
>         intervention of BOOTP relay agents.

No, I didn’t miss it at all. It’s listed under “design goals”, not 
actually under how the spec works.

By definition such a protocol cannot work across routers, because clients 
don’t know what routers are available until a DHCP server tells them.

Is there a section that describes which of the “design goals” were 
actually met?