Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

On Jun 10, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 10 jun 2011, at 16:28, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>
> > > Ok, so now we've identified the problem.
>
> > > How exactly does adding default gateway information to DHCPv6 solve this problem?
>
> > Please go back and re-read my original scenario and think about it.
>
> I don't have to, as you restate pretty much all of it here...
>
> So we agree on the problem. Now the only thing we have to do is come up with a solution that everybody likes. In a 
> greenfield situation that solution could be "compile DHCPv4 for 128 bits" but guess what, we have "legacy" IPv6 
> systems that aren't compatible with that, and we want results before those systems are all killed off.

Seems to me that adding a routing information option to DHCPv6 solves the problem
without breaking the legacy hosts.

What's wrong with that idea?

Owen