[148305] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Misconceptions, was: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Allen Simpson)
Wed Jan 11 15:13:30 2012
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:12:38 -0500
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@gmail.com>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <4F0DA391.9090900@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 1/11/12 9:58 AM, Masataka Ohta wrote:
> A better default could be that IGP will be automatically invoked
> if DHCP does not supply a default router.
>
That's ridiculous. You need some link state to even find a
DHCP server. So, the very idea that DHCP would tell you where
your routers are is preposterous on its face.
Besides, that's terrible system design. You should never design a
system where some code paths aren't exercised regularly.
> If there are multiple IGPs are implemented, snooping IGPs'
> advertisement to know which is the locally available IGP may
> also be a good idea.
>
> My point w.r.t. multiple next hop routers is that RA supplied
> information is not good enough, which means DHCP is no
> worse than RA even if there are multiple next hop routers.
>
I've not read the whole thread yet (I had read the start what
seems to be weeks ago), but I'll pipe up here and point out that
in my _original_ design, every host was running a link state IGP.
Even without any router at all, you need link state to handle
mobile nodes, hidden terminals, partitioned networks, satellite
versus land-line unidirectional links, etc, etc, etc.
Of course, all that was ripped out by the ignorant folks who
came later. Thus, IPv6 is much worse at self-configuration,
security, mobility, and *everything* than originally envisioned.
