On 12/20/13 8:07 AM, "Jamie Bowden" <ja...@photon.com> wrote:
> > >> "Parity" isn't enough information; what features are missing? RA is >>part >> of IPv6, but you don't have to use SLAAC. >> I'd say it's the DHC people who need to hear it, not the IPv6 people, >>but >> YMMV. > >I have a question. Why does DHCP hand out router, net mask, broadcast >address, etc. in IPv4; why don't we all just use RIP and be done with it? > >You don't have to like how enterprise networks are built, but you better >acknowledge that they are their own animal that have their own needs and >drivers, and telling them that the way their networks are built are wrong >and they need to change their whole architecture, separation of service, >security model, etc. to fit your idea of perfection isn't winning >friends. You are, however, influencing people. Perhaps not in the >manner you intended. So there's an interesting question. You suggest there's a disagreement between enterprise network operators and protocol designers. Who should change? I used to run an enterprise network. It was very different from an ISP network. I didn't say, "You're wrong!" I said, "What's missing?" There are business reasons to run IPv6. The fact that it's different than IPv4 is not a reason not to use it. Lee > >Jamie >