[ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NTP) OptionsforDHCPv6

[TS Glassey]

Danny
I was trying to stay as compatible as possible, but yes in the Microsoft 
world Service Records (SRV's) are the current manner to do this.  The 
problem I see is that SRV's cannot return the key as well as the address for 
secured service lookup.

Todd
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Danny Mayer" <mayer at ntp.org>
To: "Brian Utterback" <Brian.Utterback at Sun.COM>
Cc: "TS Glassey" <tglassey at earthlink.net>; <ntpwg at lists.ntp.org>; 
<dhcwg at ietf.org>; "Ted Lemon" <mellon at fugue.com>; "Richard Gayraud 
(rgayraud)" <rgayraud at cisco.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2007 7:56 PM
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] [dhcwg] Re: Network Time Protocol (NTP) 
OptionsforDHCPv6


> Brian Utterback wrote:
>> TS Glassey wrote:
>>>
>>> I still don't know that the service is needed I have heard a couple of
>>> people mandate that they think this is necessary but in actuality I
>>> still haven't heard anything that makes this mandatory. Especially
>>> since without any pain at all its pretty easy to create a set of known
>>> NTP servers and just use the local DNS service to propagate these. WKS
>>> inside of DNS is a simple method that is time tested.
>>>
>>> Todd
>>
>> Okay, so your suggestion is to not have a DHCP NTP field at all, but to
>> have
>> the clients use WKS and DNS resolution to find servers. Fair enough.
>>
>> blu
>
> Actually SRV records are what should get used. WKS is rather obsolete.
>
> Danny