[112051] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 Confusion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tony Hain)
Wed Feb 18 16:40:04 2009
From: "Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
To: "'Leo Bicknell'" <bicknell@ufp.org>, "'Aria Stewart'" <aredridel@nbtsc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090218203406.GB4391@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 13:39:57 -0800
Cc: 'nanog list' <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: alh-ietf@tndh.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Leo Bicknell wrote:
> ...
> But, when DHCPv6 was developed the "great minds of the world" decided
> less functionality was better. There /IS NO OPTION/ to send a default
> route in DHCPv6, making DHCPv6 fully dependant on RA's being turned on!
> So the IETF and other great minds have totally removed the capability
> for operators to work around this problem.
No, the decision was to not blindly import all the excess crap from IPv4. If
anyone has a reason to have a DHCPv6 option, all they need to do is specify
it. The fact that the *nog community stopped participating in the IETF has
resulted in the situation where functionality is missing, because nobody
stood up and did the work to make it happen.
Tony
