Re: RFC 5006 status

[Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>]

Stateless DHCPv6, in combination with RA/SLAAC address assignment, is  
simply not complex.  It does not require a full DHCPv6 server, easily  
fits in resource constrained devices and can be configured  
automatically.

Stateless DHCPv6 is certainly less complex than the DHCPv4 servers  
currently deployed in IPv4 gateways.

- Ralph

On Mar 18, 2010, at 1:14 AM 3/18/10, Gert Doering wrote:

> 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