RE: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6

["TJ" <trejrco () gmail com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:dwcarder () wisc edu]
> Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM
> To: surfer () mauigateway com
> Cc: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>
>
> Hey Scott,
>
> On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
> > From: "TJ" <trejrco () gmail com>
> >
> > As a general rule, most clients are following the "If we gave them
> > static
> > IPv4 addresses we will give them static IPv6 addresses"
> > (infrastructure, servers, etc).  The whole SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
> > is a separate (albeit
> > related) conversation ...
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I'm still an IPv6 wussie and would like to learn more before moving
> > forward, so would anyone care to share info on experiences with this
> > decision?
>
> Here's some pro's and con's to both
>
> SLAAC:
> - widely implemented in host v6 stacks that have shipped
> - widely implemented on v6 routers
> - really, really, really broken: it didn't support handing out
>   any DNS info until RFC 5006, thus SLAAC still requires human
>   intervention on a client to make "teh v6 interwebs" work.  It
>   will probably be a painful wait until 5006 gets more widely
>   implemented on hosts (if ever, for some) & routers.

Or rely on IPv4 to do the DNS part.  I call this "cheating", but do not mean
to include the negative connotations that come with that word :).


> - probably "faster" than dhcpv6 w/ tuning timers.  Could be
>   better for mobile thingys.
> - supports RFC 3041 "security by obscurity" extensions.
>
> DHCPv6
> - doesn't ship w/ some OS's

And some vendors have publicly stated that they would never support DHCPv6.
While I may not fully believe them (never is a long time), that is atleast
an indication not to expect it "soon".


> - new (danger code), not all features implemented
> - router support for dhcpv6 relay very limited
> - advanced things like prefix delegation don't really seem to
>   have been ironed out.
>
> In case you weren't confused enough between the two, they are not mutually
> exclusive.  You can run both SLAAC and DHCPv6 at the same time on the same
> L2.

Indeed, Stateless DHCPv6 is exactly that.  I should have mentioned that by
now - sorry!


> Links for (2) dhcpv6 implementations:
> http://klub.com.pl/dhcpv6/
> http://www.isc.org/index.pl?/sw/dhcp/dhcp4_0.php
>
> Cheers,
> Dale

/TJ