Re: Android (lack of) support for DHCPv6

[Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Chris Adams <cma () cmadams net> wrote:
> Once upon a time, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu <Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu> said:
> > On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 12:59:47 +1000, Karl Auer said:
> > > Hope the question doesn't make me look like an idiot, but why does using
> > > stateful DHCPv6 mean having to go back to NAT?
> >
> > How does the device ask for a *second* DHCPv6'ed address for tethering or
> > whatever?
>
> It's called "bridging".  Let whatever is being tethered ask directly for
> its own address.

it remains to be seen if that would actually work, and it's probably
network-dependent, right? If your notional network implemented SAVI
restrictions then a single dhcpv6 assigned address might be all you
get.

A bunch of this discussion (on both sides) seems (to me) get get back to:
  "I designed something, took a left turn and kept on driving.... and
I just don't want to revisit assumptions."

Example: "I do not want to support SLAAC because I don't want to do
RDNSS, I will provide dns servers/etc via dhcpv6"

Example: "We will not support DHCPv6 because people might assign one
address only."

Both of those have a way to a solution, neither has to be a hard/fast
rule, right?