renumbering and roaming

Karl Denninger karl at
Wed May 20 13:18:02 UTC 1998

On Wed, May 20, 1998 at 12:23:18AM -0400, Dean Anderson wrote:
> At 2:44 PM -0400 5/19/98, Clayton O'Neill wrote:
> >On 19 May 1998 08:06:24 -0400, William Allen Simpson
> ><wsimpson at> wrote:
> >|Speaking as the author of "LCP Extensions", there is no such LCP
> >|extension as "dynamically-assigned DNS servers".
> >|
> >|There is a bogus, NDA'd, Mircosoft-only, NetBEUI extension to PPP IPCP,
> >|using numbers stolen from the high end of the option space without
> >|registering with IANA, which is marginally applicable to DNS.
> >|
> >|This approach has been officially rejected by the IETF.  It is not a
> >|"best current practice".  It only works with NT servers, which no sane
> >|and stable ISP would use.
> >
> >FWIW, almost all of the NAS's in production today support Microsoft's PPP
> >extensions for dynamically assigned DNS servers.  Like it or not, it's
> >something that we have to live w/today.
> Really? I can't seem to find it in the USR manuals.
> 		--Dean

That figures and is not surprising at all.

Lucent/Livingston and ASCEND both do support it.

Of course, between the two of them they're easily a majority of the market.

Karl Denninger (karl at MCS.Net)| MCSNet - Serving Chicagoland and Wisconsin          | T1's from $600 monthly / All Lines K56Flex/DOV
			     | NEW! Corporate ISDN Prices dropped by up to 50%!
Fax:   [+1 312 803-4929]     | *SPAMBLOCK* Technology now included at no cost

More information about the NANOG mailing list