Nit: seems unlikely to me you will have any XP devices running IPv6-only; if my understanding of the situation is correct, such a device requires manual installation of the IPv6 stack and still requires IPv4 for DNS.
- Ralph On Sep 8, 2010, at 5:36 PM 9/8/10, Suresh Krishnan wrote: > Hi Doug, > > On 10-09-08 02:02 AM, Doug Barton wrote: >> On 09/07/2010 06:38 AM, JOSHI, SHRINIVAS ASHOK (SHRINIVAS ASHOK) wrote: >>> 5. Creating an alternative to DHCPv6 ? >>> >>> One SLAAC is defined to do functionality similar to DHCP (including >>> per host prefixes/options) how long before options are added so SLAAC >>> becomes an alternative to DHCPv6 ? >> This is the basis of my opposition to adopting the draft (expressed neatly >> here, as well as by other authors in this thread). > > As I said in my response to Shree, the goal is to provide support for > SLAAC-only IPv6 clients. It is not a practical option to require support for > stateful DHCPv6 for clients that are no longer supported (e.g. XP). I agree > that going forward, stateful DHCPv6 will be a solution for this problem. > > Thanks > Suresh > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
