nanog mailing list archives

Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6


From: Tim Franklin <tim () pelican org>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:48:21 +0100 (BST)

Standing back a little, I can see an argument that IPv6 would be an
easier 'sell' if there were two modes of operation, one with only
RAs, and one with only DHCPv6.

This +1.

There are plenty of enterprises, employing actual network engineers (allegedly), who are just about getting to grips 
with CIDR and VLSM.  They are *thinking* about reconfiguring their hosts to stop having 10.x.x.x/8 as the interface 
address, and letting proxy-arp on the routers worry about which subnets are which.  They *might* have been convinced 
that an ATM cloud (or sometimes even MPLS!) has robust traffic separation, and they don't need a full mesh of leased 
lines any more.

IPv6 is hugely scary as it is, without breaking their "hosts and host info" / "routers and routing info" silo model.  
Not all of the networking world runs on Internet time :(

Regards,
Tim.


Current thread: