OK.
I'll agree that the information about routing changes is available in
the router. Whether the router has all the information needed and the
mechanisms to translate that routing information into policy changes
for the hosts must also be considered.
- Ralph
On Nov 11, 2009, at 10:32 AM 11/11/09, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
Hi Ralph,
I was just commenting that the addressing policy changes triggered
by routing changes are best initiated by the router and all the
other policy changes are best initiated by the DHCP server. I was
not commenting on the suitability/ease of use of the delivery
mechanism(s) at all.
Thanks
Suresh
On 09-11-09 08:58 PM, Ralph Droms wrote:
In the discussion of IPv6 address selection , Dave Thaler asked me
to comment on this bullet from slide 10:
* DHCP option
- Hard to kick policy reconfigure by a server.
Not wanting to contribute to yet another iteration of the RA-vs-
DHCP debate, I'm responding through the mailing list. DHCPv6 has
an explicit mechanism, required by RFC 3315, in which a server
can asynchronously trigger a DHCPv6 message exchange from the
client.
Suresh commented that the router might be a better source of
updates in some circumstances, when the selection policy is
modified by changes in the routing infrastructure as propagated by
routing protocols. I haven't thought about that scenario and
can't comment...
- Ralph
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
