Greets David,
A few years ago, I posted on the DHC Wg list,
somewhat dovetailing with the direction I discern from your
post.
I consider it undesirable to cycle leases through the
primary,
as part of the normal lease life cycle.
I also believe that lease lifecycle stages should be
Distinct and independent of lease ownership status.
If a lease becomes "free", the server who issued
it,
Should be able to retain it in its pool(s) unless there is
A deliberate action to change the ownership of the lease.
If we had the above 2 aspects cleanly separated, a lease
could be
transferred from one server to another, regardless of the
life cycle
stage it is in.
(the transfer(s), of course could be initiated By either
server)
I would also like to see ownership management possibly
based on the Load Balancing rfc, or some similar hashing
concept,
e.g. transferring HBA-s to transfer ownership.
I try to keep this short, because I find that long posts,
sometimes lead to passionate (and often fruitless)
debate by folks who do not read the whole post.
At the time this was discussed on this list I could not
quite
Comprehend the objections and reasoning why the separation
of
Ownership and lease status was a bad idea. It crossed my
mind
that some folks (heaven forbid) may have a shipping product
based on some variant of the draft, and have to deal with
a tested code base, installed customer base etc...
That _would_ explain reluctance to change anything
non-trivial
in the Draft. 
Best luck & wishes,
Steve Gonczi
BTW. These are strictly my own views, not representing in
any shape or
Form my Employer's
_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg ietf.org
https://
www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
|