Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Misconceptions, was: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 22:33:32 -0500

On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 6:16 PM, Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton us> wrote:
On 12/28/2011 03:13, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

Second, publishing specifications, implementing them and waiting for
users to adopt them takes a very, very long time. For DHCPv6 support,
the time from first publication (2003) until wide availability (2011)
has been 8 years. Are we ready to live in a half-baked world for
another half a decade or more just so we can add this feature, while
layer 2 filtering and VLANs more easily support similar
functionality?

10-12 years ago I attempted to make 2 points to the IPv6 literati. First
that IPv6 would not be widely adopted in the enterprise until it had
full DHCP parity with v4. Second that the easiest way to do that would

+1000

be to declare all existing DHCPv4 options that are relevant to IPv6 as
existing in DHCPv6 by fiat, and to prevent new v6-only options from
using option numbers that already exist for v4 (and vice versa). I was
laughed out of the room on both counts. (If anyone wants more of the

similarly folks keep laughing (or at least harumphing loudly) when
enterprise folk say: "Hey, I use dhcp today for a large number of
things, I can't NOT use it going forward, support the features in v4
dhcp that I use in your new v6 thingy."

anyway, it seems to be getting slightly better, bolting more crud on
ND so you can continue to say: "Yea, but you SHOULD use ...." is
wasted breath.

-chris


  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]