On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 07:44:33PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, David W. Hankins wrote: >> [RA] fails to suck less than DHCPv4; consequently, anyone who runs missing word: dual >> stack today uses DHCPv4 to configure IPv6 (using IPv4 nameservers)! > > I wonder where you have gotten the latter misconception.
IETF 71 and previous, where DHCPv4 was used to address client systems and configure nameservers and domain search paths, while IPv6 RA was used to give IPv6 addresses. This is a rare circumstance wherein the IETF network is actually a fair model of what people really do in networks that are not ad-hoc nor thrown together at the last minute, excepting the scope of configuration state. As an example, it's what we do on our IPv4/v6 dual stack networks. Sorry for the double post, I noticed this but forgot to include a reply. -- Ash bugud-gul durbatuluk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul. Why settle for the lesser evil? https://secure.isc.org/store/t-shirt/ -- David W. Hankins "If you don't do it right the first time, Software Engineer you'll just have to do it again." Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. -- Jack T. Hankins
pgpC8QUMGCqEa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
