[133155] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Pointer for documentation on actually delivering IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
Sun Dec 5 16:11:43 2010
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2010 22:11:25 +0100
From: "Miquel van Smoorenburg" <mikevs@xs4all.net>
To: lists@billfehring.com
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin5aOQKLbiXfN9ELNpoDLBCDxn1E0ATi7wbU_XA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: , nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In article <xs4all.AANLkTin5aOQKLbiXfN9ELNpoDLBCDxn1E0ATi7wbU_XA@mail.gmail.com> you write:
>On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 19:52, Ben Jencks <ben@bjencks.net> wrote:
>> DHCPv6-PD (prefix delegation) with the relay installing static routes
>> is probably the most straightforward way.
>
>Apparently that has it's own problems right now actually:
>http://blog.ioshints.info/2010/10/dhcpv6-relaying-another-trouble-spot.html
Well, the problem described there is exactly the same problem that
already exists with plain IPv4 DHCP (a pity that FORCERENEW (rfc3203)
or something like it never took off).
If you use PPPoA/PPPoE/PPPoX with DHCPv6 PD, the problem described there
doesn't exist if your CPE is at least halfway intelligent .. it should
ofcourse do a new lease request (at least a renewal) after a PPP reconnect.
Mike.
