[106948] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (TJ)
Mon Aug 18 16:35:55 2008
From: "TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080818123346.9AC36924@resin13.mta.everyone.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:34:01 -0400
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Scott Weeks [mailto:surfer@mauigateway.com]
>Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 3:34 PM
>To: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>
>
>
>---------- trejrco@gmail.com wrote: ------------
>From: "TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com>
>
>As a general rule, most clients are following the "If we gave them =
static
>IPv4 addresses we will give them static IPv6 addresses" =
(infrastructure,
>servers, etc). The whole SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6 is a separate =
(albeit
>related) conversation ...
>----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>I'm still an IPv6 wussie and would like to learn more before moving =
forward,
>so would anyone care to share info on experiences with this decision?
Which one?
"If we gave them static IPv4 addresses we will give them static IPv6 =
addresses"
Or
"SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6"
For the first ... at the simplest, it is familiar and comfortable.
In general:
Servers, Routers, Firewalls, Switches (atleast those with L3 addresses) =
=3D=3D static address
Hosts =3D=3D dynamic ... either SLAAC or DHCPv6. Manual Configuration =
of hosts is a non-starter for most environments.
For the latter ... that gets more involved.
Many (most?) platforms do not support DHCPv6 client functionality. =
Ditto on the server side.
OTOH, SLAAC alone cannot currently give you DNS information ... a =
possible deal-breaker, that.
(Some work under way to change that, or the environment can cheat 0 rely =
on IPv4 transport for DNS :) )
>
>scott
HTH!
/TJ
