[131349] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 fc00::/7 ??? Unique local addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Fri Oct 22 10:07:05 2010
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 09:06:54 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20101022133804.GA49113@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 10/22/2010 8:38 AM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> Unfortunately the folks in the IETF don't even want to listen, to the
> point a working group chair when I tried to explain why I wanted such a
> feater told the rest of the group "He's an operator and thus doesn't
> understand how any of this works, ignore him." That's when I gave up
> on the IETF, and started working on my vendor for the solution.
>
It's popped around multiple times. The drafts won't stop until it's
implemented. The lack of it in DHCPv6, despite obvious desire for it,
seems to indicate a bias on the part of the IETF.
Here's a current draft
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dec-dhcpv6-route-option-05
Jack
