[111652] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (TJ)
Mon Feb 9 21:47:25 2009
From: "TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com>
To: "'NANOG list'" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <75cb24520902091820l29f7e7cbm5322225d8ec5ebdb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 21:47:15 -0500
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
>Why would anyone NOT want that?? what replaces that option in current RA
>deployments?
One nit - I like to differentiate between the presence of RAs (which should
be every user where IPv6 is present) and the use of SLAAC (RA + prefix).
Right now - Cheat off of IPv4's config.
(Lack of DHCPv6 client-side support, and lack of DNS v6 transport (WinXP),
necessitate this)
Hopefully soon - RFC5006.
Around the same timeframe - DHCPv6 (stateful or stateless, doesn't matter).
