Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6

["Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists () lists zabbadoz net>]

On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:10 AM, sthaug () nethelp no wrote:

> > > > DHCPv6 does not provide route information because this task is handled
> > > > by RA in IPv6.
> >
> > > Thankfully this silliness is in the process of being fixed,
> >
> > So where do I point out the stupidity of trying to fix this non-brokenness?
>
> Several large operators have said, repeatedly, that they want to use
> DHCPv6 without RA. I disagree that this is stupid.

I wonder if it's just a "violation" of rule #1: stop thinking legacy!

People are used to what they have done for a decade or two.  It's hard to
see the change and results in "why is this all so different and complicated?".
It's hard to open ones mind for the new, but it is essential to do with new
technology.

So I advice people not to get trapped by their legacy habits!

/bz

-- 
Bjoern A. Zeeb                                 You have to have visions!
         Stop bit received. Insert coin for new address family.