On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Thomas Narten <nar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > >> 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? > > yes. > > Have DHCPv6 and SLAAC run independently. If you get stuff via one or > the other or both, just use them. > > The mistake of the M&O bits was that you needed an RA to tell you to > use DHCP. But if the bits weren't set right, or something, you > wouldn't run DHCP in cases where you should have. Just decouple the > two protocols completely. > > The one downside is that you run DHCP even if there are no DHCP > servers. In some environments, that is extra traffic the operator > might not want. I recall many long threads about how the cost of those > extra DHCP pacekts on a wireless network were unacceptable...
I guess I was thinking that today you have a device, it either is configured to do dhcp or is manually configured or just is broken. In the v6 world you could just forget M&O and require someone to configure (via os config tweaks that already exist for v4 anyway) dhcpv6 if anything more complex than 'subnet + random address + defgw' are required (or if they just like DHCP over SLAAC). (are we saying the same thing? I'm --coffee so...) -chris -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
