[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-v6ops-incremental-cgn
(resend - sorry, my fingers slipped on the first try...)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rémi Després [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 2:45 AM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: Sheng Jiang; Brian E Carpenter; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; Fleischman, Eric; Russert,
> Steven W
> Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-jiang-v6ops-incremental-cgn
> Templin, Fred L - le (m/j/a) 5/15/09 9:36 PM:
> > With this said, I'd like to propose something toward Remi.
> > You will be wanting some way for CPE devices to discover
> > the ISP's 6rd-relays IPv6 prefix. This can be easily
> > accommodated by defining a new DHCPv6 option (the
> > "6rd Prefix Option"?) for which the sole purpose is
> > to convey a prefix and prefix length.
> There is indeed a need.
> Note that it should rather be a *DHCPv4* option, since it is needed
> before there is IPv6 connectivity.
Not if there is link-local IPv6 capability as ISATAP/VET
have. With link-local IPv6, DHCPv6 gives the natural
alternative for obtaining stateless information like
6rd prefix and stateful information like *real* IPv6
prefixes. I believe many customers would prefer the
> As mentioned in another email, and as far as I know, Mark Townsley is
> working on it.
> I believe it should be quickly agreed on, to expand applicability of a
> useful tool for rapid deployment of native IPv6.
Native IPv6 is not necessary with a solid VET deployment.
With VET, you deploy it once and leave it. With 6rd, you
deploy twice - once for the initial 6rd deployment and
again when the ISP has (unnecessarily) converted all of
its routers and networks to IPv6.