Boy, an awful lot of messages on this already, and what appears to be a lot of repeating the same arguments, and not actually responding to the concerns being raised (i.e., not listening). :-(
I guess I'll add my $0.02 as well. > > Thanks for the quick e-mail. As one of the co-authors, I'd in > > turn like to reply (and state that ICMPv6 PD is ANOTHER way > > to do IPv6 PD, NOT a replacement for the existing mechanism). > > FWIW, please see comments in-line: > This is probably the crux of the issue. I believe that having > multiple IETF standardized ways to achieve the same thing is a bad idea. I agree completely with this. Having multiple ways of doing the same thing inevitably increases complexity. It's usually a short-term optimization that benefits one narrow constituency (in this case, it would appear to be a group that doesn't like DHC for some vague reason). But the cost of one groups simplifcation is additional complexity for everyone else. Is there an expectation that clients will only implement one of the choices? Well, if so, the original problem isn't solved, since the operator can't rely on the PD method being used exclusively. And if a client implements both (since it's not sure which standard its peers use), which one gets used? What if both are available? and provide conflicting answers? etc., etc. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The point that there is ALREADY at least one such case (node > addressing) for which there is more than one standardized IETF way > is irrefutable. But it turns out there are different cases for these two. They do not provide exactly the same service. DHC is critical for networks where the routers/operators want to know which addresses are in use (e.g., they base access control on them, and/or do other types of filtering). Or only blackhole traffic for addresses that are known to be in use, in order to save bandwidth, etc. This is not really possibly to do with stateless address autoconfiguration, since a node picks its own address and isn't required to tell anyone. So, please explain, what technical justification PD has over DHC? Thomas -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
