> > PPP is not used here. There are numerous different deployment models, PPP > > is an expensive one that should be avoided unless there is serious use for > > it. > > While it is true that PPP is not used here, I won't say that PPP should be > avoided. > PPP is a valid and widely deployed model in DSL Broadband environment; > Broadband Forum has already published TR-187 that explains how to deploy IPv6 > with PPP. > > In addition in case of bridged Layer 2 RG model, PPP + SLAAC with the /64 > announced in the RA PIO is a valid solution.
Nobody is saying that PPP should be avoided. However, if you have an existing customer base which is DHCP based, the cost of converting this to PPP can be very significant (as in: not going to happen). Requiring PPP in order to use IPv6 (when you already have a DHCP infrastructure for your IPv4 customers) is a complete non-starter. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
