01-23-04 10:11 PM
woof <drubnone@yahoo.com> wrote:quote:
> I assume, given your "like hell", this description of DHCP
> is the unix implimentation?
DHCP is described by some well-know RFC, of course, since
Microsoft can't implement a protocol 'as is', they have their
own quirks.
quote:
> read that applies to Windows stuff.
Why should they document something for someone else? Hell! They
haven't yet documented how their crappy disk sharing works after
ten years they started with it. And they have based _everything_
on that crap! Not to speak about other 'interesting' things like
the format of their word processor documents file...
quote:
> static machine shows up, does DHCP go and ping the previous
> lease owner?
It depends by the client and the server. If the server is dumb
and send an IP that is in use but the client is smart enough to
check it will refuse the IP and ask for another. On the other
end, if the server is smart enough and check _before_ handing
out the IP the client can be dumb. Dumb client are likely to be
found in very dumb or memory-restricted devices (handheld and
the like), while smart servers are likely to be found in Unixworld.
AFAIK Microsoft is quite dumb in both side. The server won't give
a damn and if the client can't get the IP he wants he will assume
a generic IP that won't connect to anything, so you ends up with a
non-networked machine... veeeeery clever Redmond...
Davide
--
| The relative speed of a computer, regardless of CPU architecture, is
| inversely proportional to the number of Microsoft products installed.
| -- From a Slashdot.org post
[ Post a follow-up to this message ]
|