Re: Mac OS X 10.7, still no DHCPv6

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Feb 28, 2011, at 7:34 AM, Joe Abley wrote:

> On 2011-02-28, at 10:27, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> > On 28/02/2011 14:59, Joe Abley wrote:
> > > I'm not sure why people keep
> > > fixating on that as an end goal. The future we ought to be working
> > > towards is a consistent, reliable, dual-stack environment. There's no
> > > point worrying about v6-only operations if we can't get dual-stack
> > > working reliably.
> >
> > That's "dual-stack" as in 
> > "dual-stack-except-one-of-the-stacks-really-doesn't-work-properly-so-we'll-fudge-around-it"? :-)
>
> You're describing where we are. I'm talking about where I think we should be planning to arrive.
Your description sounds more like where we should be making a plane change.
The eventual destination is IPv6-only. Dual-stack is a temporary stopover along the way.
However, you are partially right in that we should be focusing on arriving at the first
stop-over until we arrive there. Then we can start navigating from there to the final
destination.

> > Look, my original point is that RA is a brilliant solution for a problem which never really existed.  Now, can we 
> > all just ignore RA and work towards DHCPv6 because that's what's actually needed in the real world?
>
> RA and DHCPv6 work together. It's different from DHCP in IPv4. Run with it. Sending people back to the drawing board 
> at this late stage in the game (a) isn't going to happen and (b) isn't going to help anybody.
And the model breaks badly at layers 8-10 in most enterprises and many other organizations.

> > We haven't got there because I can't plug in my laptop into any arbitrary ipv6-only network and expect to be able to 
> > load up ipv6.google.com.
> >
> > Is that too high a standard to work towards? :-)
>
> As I thought I mentioned, yes. Forget v6-only right now. Dual-stack is an operationally-harder problem, and it's a 
> necessary prerequisite.
For some situations at this point, that may not actually be true. It will be soon enough that it won't even be possible.

Owen