On 2004-05-31, Pekka Savola wrote:
Below are my comments on draft-ietf-ipv6-optimistic-dad-00.txt.
Thanks for your feedback Pekka, I've added some thoughts/responses
below. All comments welcome!
1) The draft specifies that instead of using a tentative address as the
source address for RS,
Hi All,
I have a question about DHCPv6 prefix delegation (RFC 3633).
Given the following network:
ISP (Location of DHCPv6 server)
|
|
CPE /48
/ \
/ \
---BA---
||
Is it possible to
Does this seem useful? Does the format make sense? Any other potential
uses of such a facility if it were adopted?
It makes sense, but there is one pitfall. More and more, firewalls come
with restrictive rules about what ICMP packets will be allowed. These
rules typically operate on ICMP type
Given the following network:
ISP (Location of DHCPv6 server)
|
|
CPE /48
/ \
/ \
---BA---
||
Is it possible to configure the DHCP server to allocate :
- a /48
You are asking a question which mixes technology with policy. The simple
answer to your question is YES. The complex answer is a function of the
policy at the ISP DHCP server. Will it accept requests from A B? Are you
expecting the set of /64's allocated to A B to be contained within the /48
at
[G'day Eric, thanks for your input ...]
On 2004-06-01, Erik Nordmark wrote:
[Pekka Savola wrote:]
1) The draft specifies that instead of using a tentative address as the
source address for RS, another address or the unspecified address should be
used instead. To me, using the
