On 2011-05-23, at 23:56 , Mark Smith wrote:
Christopher Morrow christopher.mor...@gmail.com writes:
Just say that at startup time, invoke SLAAC DHCPv6 both. Then use
whatever is available. That would have been simple and
predictable. (And avoided 10GB of mailing list discussion!)
I'm
In your letter dated Mon, 30 May 2011 12:47:19 +0200 you wrote:
Conflict resolution is not really necessary. What kind of conflict do you have
to solve? If a network runs a DHCPv6 server that also hands out addresses, th
e network operators probably want people to use DHCPv6 over SLAAC, so if a
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 12:47:19 +0200 From: Markus Hanauska
hanau...@equinux.de To: Mark Smith
i...@69706e6720323030352d30312d31340a.nosense.org Cc: Thomas Narten
nar...@us.ibm.com, ipv6@ietf.org ipv6@ietf.org, Ralph Droms
rdroms.i...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Node Requirements:
In your letter dated Mon, 30 May 2011 12:47:19 +0200 you wrote:
Then a node has both, a SLAAC address and a DHCPv6 address. Where is the probl
em? The only problem I can think of is the issue I was trying to discuss here
a couple of weeks ago: An address collision between SLAAC addresses and
Ray,
On 2011-05-31 08:05, Ray Hunter wrote:
...
Which source address (SLAAC/DHCPv6) would be used by the client for an
outbound session if a SLAAC address and a DHCPv6 were both configured on
the same link and with the same prefix, in the absence of a flag?
Whichever RFC3484bis or the local
On May 30, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
For example, setting the DSCP *as a function of
the source address* makes me cringe. We're going to have to get used to
the fact that IP addresses are not constants.
good grief. The only reasonable use of a DSCP is to identify the set of
This is danger of going off topic I know (maybe it should go in v6ops),
but it's important to me to be able to understand the consequences of
the discussion, so please bear with me. It's definitely going to become
an operational FAQ, unless it is very clear whether/how a network
operator can
On May 30, 2011, at 3:57 PM, Ray Hunter wrote:
This is danger of going off topic I know (maybe it should go in v6ops), but
it's important to me to be able to understand the consequences of the
discussion, so please bear with me. It's definitely going to become an
operational FAQ, unless
