nanog mailing list archives

Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN


From: Mark Smith <nanog () 85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc nosense org>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:46:00 +1030

On Thu, 29 Oct 2009 08:40:46 +0900
Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:

This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards
packets makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
No, what we want are better first hop redundancy protocols, and
DHCP for v6, so that everyone who has extracted any value from DHCP
in their toolkit can continue to do so, and roll out v6 !

no.  what we need is more religious v6 fanatics to make use of v6 hard
to roll out on existing networks.  after all, v6 is soooo wonderful we
should be happy to double our opex for the privilege of using such a
fantastic protocol.

v6 fanaticism has done vastly more damage to v6 deployment than the v6
haters.  arrogance kills.


As does excessive pessimism.








Current thread: