nanog mailing list archives

Re: [DCHPv6] was Re: v6 subnet size for DSL & leased line customers


From: David Barak <thegameiam () yahoo com>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 19:46:43 -0800 (PST)


I have a modest proposal for providing the functionality of DHCPv4 in IPv6 autoconf:

How about using the mechanism in RFC 5075 to specify all of these variables as RA flags?

And as long as the variables also get defined as DHCPv6 fields, perhaps we could plan on having prefix delegation 
include these options, which the requesting router could then turn around and include in the RAs sent out on the link 
toward the customer.

Am I missing something?

David Barak
Need Geek Rock?  Try The Franchise: 
http://www.listentothefranchise.com


--- On Thu, 12/27/07, James R. Cutler <james.cutler () consultant com> wrote:

From: James R. Cutler <james.cutler () consultant com>
Subject: [DCHPv6] was Re: v6 subnet size for DSL & leased line customers
To: "North American Network Operators Group" <nanog () merit edu>
Date: Thursday, December 27, 2007, 9:37 PM
And, besides the list forwarded below,
Designated printers,
Preferred DNS Servers,
and, maybe, more.

Even in a large enterprise, the ratio of
"routers" to DHCP servers  
makes control of many end system parameters via DHCP a
management win  
compared to configuration of "routers" with this
"non-network core"  
data.  (In case I was to abstruse, It is cheaper to
maintain end  
system parameters in a smaller number of DHCP servers than
in a  
larger number of "routers".)

This is completely separate from the fact that many
experienced  
router engineers are smart enough configure routers with
NTP server  
addresses in preference to DNS names, and likewise for many
other  
parameters.

The end system population has requirements which respond
much more  
dynamically to business requirements than do router
configurations,  
which respond mostly to wiring configurations which are, by
 
comparison, static.  The statement that DHCP is not needed
for IPv6  
packet routing may well be exactly accurate.  The absence
of good  
DHCP support in IPv6 has costly consequences for enterprise
 
management, of which IP routing is a small part.

You have seen this before from me:  Consider the
Customer/Business  
Management viewpoint, not just that of routing packets
around between  
boxes.  Pull your head out of your patch panel and look at
all the  
business requirements.  If you can show me a more cost
effective way  
to distribute all the parameters mentioned here to all end
systems,  
I'll support it.  In the meantime, don't use
religious arguments to  
prevent me from using whatever is appropriate to manage my
business.   
I'll even use NAT boxes, if there is no equivalently
affordable  
stateful firewall box!

      Cutler

Begin forwarded message:

From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: December 27, 2007 7:33:08 PM EST
To: North American Network Operators Group
<nanog () merit edu>
Subject: Re: v6 subnet size for DSL & leased line
customers

In a message written on Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at
10:57:59PM +0100,  
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
It is wih IPv6: you just connect the ethernet
cable and the RAs take
care of the rest. _You_ _really_ _don't_
_need_ _DHCP_ _for_ _IPv6_.
If you need extreme control then manual
configuration will give you
that, which may be appropriate in some cases, such
as servers.

Really.  I didn't know RA's could:

- Configure NTP servers for me.
- Tell me where to netboot from.
- Enter dynamic DNS entries in the DNS tree for me.
- Tell me my domain name.
- Tell me the VLAN to use for IP Telephony.

Those are things I use on a regular basis I'd
really rather not
manually configure.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request () tmbg org,
www.tmbg.org

James R. Cutler
james.cutler () consultant com


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


Current thread: