[En-Nut-Discussion] RFC: Extending Network Configuration

[Thiago A. Corrêa]

Hi Bob,

    In some applications you don't want to use DHCP, but static config. ;)
    But you are right, and it should also come from DHCP when you are
using it (and currently it's not).

Cheers,
    Thiago A. Corrêa

On 10/31/06, Bob Shaver <bobs at pmdinc.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> > I'm currently working on adding a few things to Nut/OS. One being SNTP
> > resolution via DHCP. In the course of this I have stumbled across a few
> > details that require some changes.
> >
> > The first is that the NUTCONF structure will have to grow to add IP
> > Addresses for DNS (two entries) and NTP. There is not much what we can do
> > about NUTCONF growing - it was bound to happed one day - so anybody that has
> > data stored in the EEPROM right behind NUTCONF will have to shift that data.
>
> Possibly dumb comment from someone new to EtherNut, but....
>
> DNS info should come as part of the DHCP packet (i.e. IP address, netmask,
> gateway and DNS), should it not?  So why should the EEPROM cfg be extended to
> hold it if it is dynamic?
>
> Or are you simply allowing for situations when DHCP does NOT provide this info,
> or when DHCP is not used?
>
>
> Bob.
>
> _______________________________________________
> En-Nut-Discussion mailing list
> En-Nut-Discussion at egnite.de
> http://www.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo.cgi/en-nut-discussion
>