On Aug 23, 2007, at 5:20 AM, Mark Smith wrote:
I don't like doing that sort of thing, but I like that both the DHCP
server and hosts are robust enough to handle it gracefully when I
do. A
few extra packets seems to me to be a relatively small price to pay
for
robustness and resilience.
I'm surprised that you would manually allocate an IPv6 address,
although I can understand why you might do that with an IPv4
address. The DHCPv4 server unicasts an ICMP Echo request to verify
the address, which acts as a first-line defense against conflicts due
to manual allocation. The client further ARPs for the IP address
before using it, which acts as a second line of defense. I'd be
surprised if either technique was required to have a working DHCPv6
service - the likelihood of a scarcity-induced address conflict is so
small.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
