>> I agree that one could benefit in some cases from NTP through RA's, however >> I don't see any info on "cooperation" between DHCPv6 and RA in your draft, >> i.e. what is you get your NTP through both channels (both RA and DHCPv6) ? >> What if content is different on these 2 channels ? What if (if received on >> both >> channels) the content of one of them is not available anymore at some point >> in >> time ? ..., [Dacheng Zhang] We originally intend to provide a mechanism which is complementary to the solution using DHCP. So basically, we just consider the scenarios where DHCP is not deployed. But your comments are very interesting, we should consider them in the next version of the draft. >> Apart from that, we now have DNS support in RA, you're adding NTP, what's >> next ... ? [Dacheng Zhang] That is a very good question. Maybe NTP can be the last one, maybe not. I think this issue is worthwhile for us to spend more time on it.
>> case the info is also present though DHCPv6, hence the more complex it'll get >> letting them work together. >> [Dacheng Zhang] If there is already a DHCPv6 server where users can learn where to find a NTP server, then we may not have to provide the NTP server information in RAes. As what I have said above, we expect to provide a way to locate NTP servers when SLAAC is employed. >> >> regs >> >> Carl Wuyts >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> Hing-Kam (Kam) Lam >> Sent: donderdag 22 december 2011 2:15 >> To: Samita Chakrabarti >> Cc: 6man Mailing List >> Subject: Re: IPv6 Router Advertisement Option for NTP Server Configuration >> >> Yes, i agree with Manav and Samita. There are networks where SLAAC is >> essential and NTP being a core component, must get extended. >> >> Kam >> >> On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Samita Chakrabarti >> <samita.chakraba...@ericsson.com> wrote: >> > >> > Agree with Manav on the usecases. >> > >> > Adhoc type of networks, m2m IoT networks and some home networks >> benefit from SLAAC where DHCP Service may not make sense or may be an >> overhead to maintain. >> > >> > -Samita >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf >> > Of Bhatia, Manav (Manav) >> > Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:52 PM >> > To: Doug Barton >> > Cc: 6man Mailing List >> > Subject: RE: IPv6 Router Advertisement Option for NTP Server >> > Configuration >> > >> > Hi Doug, >> > >> >> >> >> Sort of surprised that no one else has responded so far, but I'll >> >> bite. >> >> Quite simply, "no." Slightly less simply, "use DHCP since that's what >> >> it's for." >> >> >> > >> > I wish it were this simple. >> > >> > Different operators have different requirements and preferences based on >> their environments. I have seen deployments where SLAAC is much more >> useful than DHCPv6. I've seen deployments where DHCPv6 is needed. So both >> have a place and we should let the operators decide what they want to use. >> Environments with 4 to 20 devices in them (small businesses) may not want >> the complexity of setting up a central server. Those environments are >> probably more suited for SLAAC. >> > >> > We have heard customers asking SLAAC to be extended to support NTP, >> "boot-file", "next-server" and a few other things that are currently only >> available with DHCP. >> > >> > Currently, operators need to use both SLAAC and DHCP to run their >> networks. This is far from ideal. Far better for organizations to look at 2 >> complete solutions and pick the solution that works best for them in their >> environment. >> > >> > Today, we can get NTP server information only with DHCP. DHCP only works >> after RAs have been processed. In some environments (mobile IPv6) delays in >> acquiring NTP and other servers information is critical and waiting for DHCP >> to >> come up is NOT an ideal solution. >> > >> > Cheers, Manav >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > 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 >> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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 >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
