On 2010-09-09 17:43, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>> I can't see why that would be a problem for an operator who uses
>> DHCPv6 as their supported mechanism.
>
> I'm sure there are a lot in the IETF that agrees with you that they
> don't understand why it's a problem, because the IETF has historically
> been totally uninterested in security in development.
That really hasn't been true for many years now. But as you said yourself
a few hours later:
On 2010-09-10 01:11, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
...
> SLAAC is fine for home networks (and some enterprise networks).
That's exactly what (IMHO) we need to preserve, which has the side
effect that it's going to be the default mechanism for IPv6 nodes
shipped out into the SOHO market. I expect DHCPv6 to be the default
for nodes shipped into the ISP and large enterprise market.
Brian
Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
