Hi Tim,
Tim Chown wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 09:59:20AM -0800, Christian Huitema wrote:
It worked fine when we ran it at IETF51 in London.
You do mean DHCPv6 for DNS configuration, right? Many platforms do not
support address assignment via DHCPv6...
I think the idea is for DNS resolver dis
On Tue, Oct 28, 2003 at 09:59:20AM -0800, Christian Huitema wrote:
> >
> > It worked fine when we ran it at IETF51 in London.
>
> You do mean DHCPv6 for DNS configuration, right? Many platforms do not
> support address assignment via DHCPv6...
I think the idea is for DNS resolver discovery... bu
> > This keeps popping up and we don't seem to be converging. Just
before
> > reading this thread I contacted some people about trying DHCPv6 on
the
> > MSP IETF network. I have no strong preference (yet) for either
DHCPv6
> > or RA. Let's just give DHCPv6 a try.
> >
> > What do you think of this i
Ronald,
> This keeps popping up and we don't seem to be converging. Just before
> reading this thread I contacted some people about trying DHCPv6 on the
> MSP IETF network. I have no strong preference (yet) for either DHCPv6
> or RA. Let's just give DHCPv6 a try.
>
> What do you think of this id
Following up on Pekka's e-mail, the DNS configuration problem now belongs to
the dnsop WG, and followups to this thread should be posted to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Most (if not all) of the issues from this thread have already been discussed
at the dnsop WG meeting in Vienna and on [EMAIL PROTECTED] Plea
A student in my IPv6 class this week made the comment regarding IPv6:
"It seems like the paint isn't dry yet!"
IPv6 needs stability and constant changes scare adopters away. I agree
DNS should be a component of RA's. But I feel strongly that we need to
stop making changes and show the industry
On 23 okt 2003, at 9:39, Tim Chown wrote:
It will be interesting to see what the Moonv6 work may have to say in
this area, as the issue I'm sure will have been encountered there.
There are still very few people working in networks where IPv6
transport DNS lookup is a requirement, hence this i
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:03:12 +0100,
> Tim Chown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> > There seem to be a handful DHCPv6 implementations, but no stripped down
>> > DHCPv6 Lite implementations yet (the Lite version not maintaining state
>> > for IP leases etc).
>>
>> I tried KAME's dhcp6[sc]. I
The Cisco IOS DHCPv6 server does both stateless DHCP and PD. The two
functions can be configured independently, so stateless DHCP can be
configured with just a couple of CLI commands. Of course, the PD code is
still in the IOS footprint...
The primary problem at this point is deploy a client in h
Hi,
Could we drop this thread here? :-)
IMHO, it's no use to try chase down this particular rathole in *this*
working group as well.
Just state that the discovery/configuration of DNS is outside of the scope
of this specification. Additions can be defined separately in DNSOP or
other WGs if
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 11:40:29AM +0200, Ronald van der Pol wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 08:39:37 +0100, Tim Chown wrote:
>
> > Iljitsch, I agree. This has been discussed a lot on the dnsop list...
> > there is currently no consensus about DHCPv6(Lite) vs RA-based discovery.
>
> This keeps
On Thu, Oct 23, 2003 at 08:39:37 +0100, Tim Chown wrote:
> Iljitsch, I agree. This has been discussed a lot on the dnsop list...
> there is currently no consensus about DHCPv6(Lite) vs RA-based discovery.
This keeps popping up and we don't seem to be converging. Just before
reading this thread
Hi all,
There is another draft for RA-based DNS Discovery.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jeong-hmipv6-dns-optimization-01.txt
I am one of RA-camp :-), but I agree DHCPv6 is useful
in many cases.
However, in wireless networks, such as HMIPv6, NEMO
and MANET connected to the Internet,
RA
Iljitsch, I agree. This has been discussed a lot on the dnsop list...
there is currently no consensus about DHCPv6(Lite) vs RA-based discovery.
It will be interesting to see what the Moonv6 work may have to say in this
area, as the issue I'm sure will have been encountered there. There are
sti
Hello itojun
>Hesham's statement does not reject RA-based DNS discovery, it
>seems to me. there's nothing wrong with the above-quoted line.
Yes, I didn't say something was wrong but considered one of
issue.
Regards
Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics
On 23 okt 2003, at 8:46, Soliman Hesham wrote:
Why is there no mechanism to learn DNS addresses through router
advertisements?
=> A couple of years ago there was a DT that compared several
different ways of achieving this. The proposal you mentioned
was one of those addressed. The DT settled on a
> >DHCPv6 allows for DNS configuration in hosts among other things.
> Please don't definitely say that. As I said, RA based DNS discovery
> is work in progress.
Hesham's statement does not reject RA-based DNS discovery, it
seems to me. there's nothing wrong with the above-quoted l
Hello Hesham
>DHCPv6 allows for DNS configuration in hosts among other things.
Please don't definitely say that. As I said, RA based DNS discovery
is work in progress.
Regards
Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics
---
itsch van Beijnum
> Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 3:37 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: "RFC 2461bis" issue: DNS configuration
>
>
> I haven't been on this list very long so I'm unaware of the
> reasons to
> revisit 2461 and I don't k
> I haven't been on this list very long so I'm unaware of the
> reasons to
> revisit 2461 and I don't know whether the following issue has been
> discussed, but:
>
> Why is there no mechanism to learn DNS addresses through router
> advertisements?
>
> It is currently possible to att
I haven't been on this list very long so I'm unaware of the reasons to
revisit 2461 and I don't know whether the following issue has been
discussed, but:
Why is there no mechanism to learn DNS addresses through router
advertisements?
It is currently possible to attach a host to a link with one
21 matches
Mail list logo
