On Sat, 20 Oct 2012, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:

One point that guided towards choosing ND over DHCP is topology. DHCP topology can be relatively complex with Client/Relay/Server, whereas ND is simpler one-on-one.

There is nothing saying DHCPv6-PD can't be done in a single device (the router itself). That's what I do in my home, cisco router, local DHCPv6-PD pool, local DHCPv6-PD server, also installing routes into RIB.

_and_ Relay (or Server).  This may be feasible in practice but I think
it would be cleaner to have distinct protocols on a same machine for
receiving a prefix and for sending a prefix.

What is cleaner is to use existing standards where there already is running code.

There is also the question of availability of DHCP software on smaller platforms which have no SIM card. It may be easier to do this with ND in smaller settings.

I'd imagine that there already are 2-3 existing FOSS available implementations that do what you need for DHCPv6-PD client and server. Instead you want to invent a new standard and create new code.

I'm not saying this shouldn't be done, I'm just saying I don't really see the rationale for it. I used to hate DHCPv6 role in IPv6, but after a few years of being exposed to it, I've come to accept that this is the way it is. There is code going back to a standard Windows Vista that correctly implements DHCPv6-PD client, and that is what, 5-6 years ago it was released? I've had PD in my home on Cisco code for 3-5 years already, with no server infrastructure at all, just single device doing "everything" for the role needed.

If this was 2002, I'd agree with you that ND PD could be feasable, but I believe the train has already left the station and we should focus on keeping IPv6 stable when it comes to how it works, and get implementations going, not new standards.

--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swm...@swm.pp.se
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to