Re: Mac OS X 10.7, still no DHCPv6

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Feb 27, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:

> In message <20110227204511.GM27578 () virtual bogons net>, Simon Lockhart writes:
> > On Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 07:22:08AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > > > This is often required for legislation compliance. DHCP does this well.
> > >
> > > Does it really matter what address a customer has as long as it comes from
> > > the /64, /56 or /48 assigned to them?
> >
> > You are assuming an access technology that lends itself to subnet-per-custome
> > r.
> >
> > I run a network with 50,000+ end users using ethernet-based access to the
> > user's room. In IPv4, I run 1 or more subnets per building (depending on the 
> > number of rooms in the build). I use DHCP to assign IPs, and record the 
> > DHCP assignments allow me to trace users in the event of abuse complaints. I
> > use DHCP Option82 to allow me to correlate multiple devices in a user's room.
> > I feed the DHCP information into my bandwidth management platform to enforce
> > different levels (i.e. speeds) of service per user depending on what they've
> > purchased.
> >
> > I have yet to come up with a viable solution to do all of the above in IPv6
> > without using DHCPv6. At the moment, that means that OSX users are not going
> > to get IPv6.
>
> Have you *asked* your vendors for a alternate solution?
>
> DHCP kills privacy addresses.

In many environments, this is a feature, not a bug.

> DHCP kills CGAs.
In many environments, this is a feature, not a bug.

I would, in fact, posit that some of the people complaining about the lack of
DHCP are doing so precisely because of a desire to kill these things in their
environment.

Owen