Shane Kerr wrote:
> I know there's a lot of anti-DHCP sentiment, especially in the IPv6
> crowd. I think it is misplaced; DHCP is at worst a necessary evil, and
> at best an elegant solution to the problem space where it sits.
Right.
The problem is that so called "stateless autoconfiguration" has never
been a well defined concept and is no better than DHCP.
Problem space of ND is not well defined, either, which causes a lot
of troubles.
For example, timing constraints of RFC2462 are often annoying.
As a result, RFC3775 denies RFC2462 that:
o MinRtrAdvInterval 0.03 seconds
o MaxRtrAdvInterval 0.07 seconds
RFC 2462 [13] specifies that in normal processing for Duplicate
Address Detection, the node SHOULD delay sending the initial Neighbor
Solicitation message by a random delay between 0 and
MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_DELAY. Since delaying DAD can result in
significant delays in configuring a new care-of address when the
Mobile Node moves to a new link, the Mobile Node preferably SHOULD
NOT delay DAD when configuring a new care-of address.
which is an evidence that problem space of ND excluded mobile
environment.
Like that, it is natural that DHCP people think DAD annoying.
Masataka Ohta
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
