Hi Syed,
Syed Ajim Hussain wrote:
Hi
Francis/Jhon
Thanks for your information. Why IPv6 Broadband access service is so
dependent on DHCP6. Even if you run DHCP6-Relay on NAS there is some
problem in NAS for maintaining Route-information, Since NAS does not
know
What prefixes are alloca
Hi
Francis/Jhon
Thanks for your information. Why IPv6 Broadband access service is so
dependent on DHCP6. Even if you run DHCP6-Relay on NAS there is some
problem in NAS for maintaining Route-information, Since NAS does not
know
What prefixes are allocated to internal access networks. Sinc
Dan Lanciani wrote:
I thought I made this pretty clear in the portions of my note which you
snipped, but I'll try to run through it one more time.
-Scalable PI space without distributed routing tables probably requires
a full identifier/locator split.
-An identifier/locator split almost certai
David Conrad wrote:
Eliot,
On Oct 15, 2005, at 2:34 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
The IETF cannot legislate prefix lengths, but the argument behind
conservation beyond /48 would be utterly silly and demonstrates a
"revenue opportunity", plain and simple.
When multiple /19s and /20s have been all
I agree with Francis on this.
John
>In RADIUS you have Framed-IPv6-Prefix for the PPP link itself
>and Delegated-IPv6-Prefix (defined in an I-D) for prefix
>delegation but PPP can't delegate a prefix, you should use
>DHCPv6 for this job.
>
>Regards
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>PS: the DHCPv6 Relay
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005, Dan Lanciani wrote:
> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 16:55:39 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Dan Lanciani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: ipv6@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Multi-homing BOF at NANOG 35
>
[snip]
>
> IPv6 itself does nothing good for (3). PI allocations may well be available
> to some
In RADIUS you have Framed-IPv6-Prefix for the PPP link itself and
Delegated-IPv6-Prefix (defined in an I-D) for prefix delegation but
PPP can't delegate a prefix, you should use DHCPv6 for this job.
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS: the DHCPv6 Relay RADIUS Attribute Option can bind RADIUS on the NAS
David Conrad wrote:
On Oct 15, 2005, at 2:34 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
The IETF cannot legislate prefix lengths, but the argument behind
conservation beyond /48 would be utterly silly and demonstrates a
"revenue opportunity", plain and simple.
When multiple /19s and /20s have been allocated and
