Re: ISC's EoL dhcp suite, including dhcpd

On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 00:11:52 +0700
Robert Elz <[email protected]> wrote:

>     Date:        Wed, 25 Jun 2025 20:40:19 -0700
>     From:        John Nemeth <[email protected]>
>     Message-ID:  <[email protected]>
> 
>   | } I think we should just drop isc-dhcpd from the base system and let
>   | } users install a DHCP server package if they want.
> 
> I disagree, particularly about that one - a site needs one of two
> things to be able to "install a DHCP server package if they want".
> They either need to have a DHCP server already (in which case they
> probably don't really want it, and whether it is there or not,
> unconfigured, and not enabled, is irrelevant) or they need someone
> knowledgeable enough about network setup to configure everything
> manually.   That second one is becoming rarer.
>
> A dhcp relay is even more likely to be needed, it allows any NetBSD
> host with 2 (or more) interfaces to configure itself as a router,
> and connect one stub lan to the main one - but for that to work,
> dhcp requests on the stub lan need to be relayed (and the responses
> returned) to whatever dhcp server is on the main LAN.
> 
> So, while replacing dhcpd with something else is certainly an option,
> removing it isn't.   "How do I fetch package whatever?"  Just "pkg_add..."
> (or whatever method you prefer to suggest".   But that says "network
> unreachable".   "What does your network configuration look like?"
> "My what?" ...   What is needed is to fetch a dhcp server, but to do
> that the network needs configuring, which really needs a dhcp server.
> The perfect illustration of a catch-22.   If you don't need it, you
> can have it, if you need it, you don't qualify to get it.

You really need DHCP client for this, NOT server.

So didn't read rest of message as nonsense.
 
-- 
WBR, @nuclight