[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC 5006 status

You still miss my point. I don't think sending config info in RAs is necessarily a bad idea. The IETF has worked from an architectural guideline of providing one way to carry config. Some network operators would rather use one protocol to carry config, be that ND or DHCP. It's just a different philosophy.
I do think the idea of carrying config info in RAs is being sold with FUD. I also think the ways in which adding more config info to RAs ought to be thought through fairly carefully, based on some of the IETF's relevant experience with DHCP. 

- Ralph

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


Hi,

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 12:40:15PM -0700, Ralph Droms wrote:

I don't  happen to share your opinion that "[t]he IETF has solidly
messed up this part of IPv6 by delaying things for 10 years or so,"
No need to share any opinion here. Just try to run an IPv6-only network 
with Windows, Linux and MacOS clients, and consider whether the IETF
might have given vendors better guidance. Or finished one or the other 
RFC 5 years earlier.
As an operational person, this endless bickering between the RA camp and the "what do you need RA for that, when DHCP can do this all along" has 
FAIL stamped all over it.

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