On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:11 PM, Thomas Narten <nar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > Christopher Morrow <christopher.mor...@gmail.com> writes: > >> one gotcha with 'dhcp only' is perhaps folks mean: "slaac to signal v6 >> is on-net, but require full config from a dhcpv6 server". >> How does a host know that v6 is available otherwise? (this may be why >> someone said "you don't really want to do that..') > > Well, if I could go back in time, I would never have defined the M&O > bits at all. > > Just say that at startup time, invoke SLAAC & DHCPv6 both. Then use > whatever is available. That would have been simple and > predictable. (And avoided 10GB of mailing list discussion!) > > (Hmm, maybe I should just write such a spec now, given the M&O bit > definitions are in the twilight zone anyway... Discussion of what to > do with them was effectively removed from the last revisions of the > SLAAC documents, so now there is no clear guidance on how to process > them. The IETF at its finest...)
ok, so ... as a thought experiment, in v4 you wake up, decide you have no address and are supposed to dhcp for that.. in v6, you wake up decide you have no address (and don't know if v4/v6 are available)... if you are configured for v6 dhcp, you make that request and get all the 'right' data. Essentially, spec dhcpv6 host actions to be the same as v4? > Thomas > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
