nanog mailing list archives
RE: {SPAM?} Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN
From: "TJ" <trejrco () gmail com>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 13:33:52 -0400
I notice that Cisco has a "prefix no-autoconfig" statement in some
Yes, advertise it as on-link but not suitable for autoconfig. You would want to do this (along with the M & O bits) for a stateful-DHCPv6 segment ...
From what I've been told, Cisco is actively working on RA-gaurd fortheir managed switching platforms, which will be nice to see.
And not just Cisco, IIRC it is an open standard anyone can implement ... ?
The SLAAC vs. DHCPv6 war all seems a bit silly. They're both tools that are designed to compliment one another, and both have their uses.
++1 (And if I could vote "yes" on that statement more than once on that I would ...) /TJ
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Chuck Anderson (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Nathan Ward (Oct 18)
- RE: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN TJ (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Andy Davidson (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Nathan Ward (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Owen DeLong (Oct 18)
- RE: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN TJ (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Nathan Ward (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Kevin Loch (Oct 18)
- Re: {SPAM?} Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Ray Soucy (Oct 18)
- RE: {SPAM?} Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN TJ (Oct 18)
- Re: {SPAM?} Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Ray Soucy (Oct 18)
- RE: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN TJ (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Kevin Loch (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Chuck Anderson (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Nick Hilliard (Oct 18)
- RE: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN TJ (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Matthew Kaufman (Oct 18)
- RE: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN TJ (Oct 18)
- Re: IPv6 Deployment for the LAN Mohacsi Janos (Oct 19)