[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: RFC 5006 status
- To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
- Subject: Re: RFC 5006 status
- From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
- Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:14:45 +0100
- Cc: "Durand, Alain" <alain_durand@cable.comcast.com>, Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>, Lindqvist Kurt Erik <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>, Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>, 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@windows.microsoft.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>, jjeong@cs.umn.edu, luc.beloeil@orange-ftgroup.com, smadanapalli@gmail.com, Daniel Park <soohong.park@samsung.com>
- In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.1.10.1003180441110.9819@uplift.swm.pp.se>
- References: <C7C67F1D.37A5F%alain_durand@cable.comcast.com> <alpine.DEB.1.10.1003180441110.9819@uplift.swm.pp.se>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 04:44:59AM +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> I favour this approach. With my ISP hat on, I want everything that has to
> do with addresses to be handled by DHCPv6 (this is a MUST to have
> tracability), the rest can be handled by SLAAC or DHCPv6. I'd imagine this
> is totally the opposite of the original intentions of SLAAC.
>
> In a home scenario, I'd like to leave out the complexity of DHCPv6 if
> possible, so there I favour RFC5006.
Seconded, for both.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 150584
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279