[138047] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Mac OS X 10.7, still no DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Sun Feb 27 17:43:25 2011
To: Simon Lockhart <simon@slimey.org>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 27 Feb 2011 20:45:12 -0000."
<20110227204511.GM27578@virtual.bogons.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 09:39:24 +1100
Cc: Chuck Anderson <cra@WPI.EDU>, I2 IPv6 working group <wg-ipv6@internet2.edu>,
nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <20110227204511.GM27578@virtual.bogons.net>, Simon Lockhart writes:
> On Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 07:22:08AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
> > > This is often required for legislation compliance. DHCP does this well.
> >
> > Does it really matter what address a customer has as long as it comes from
> > the /64, /56 or /48 assigned to them?
>
> You are assuming an access technology that lends itself to subnet-per-custome
> r.
>
> I run a network with 50,000+ end users using ethernet-based access to the
> user's room. In IPv4, I run 1 or more subnets per building (depending on the
> number of rooms in the build). I use DHCP to assign IPs, and record the
> DHCP assignments allow me to trace users in the event of abuse complaints. I
> use DHCP Option82 to allow me to correlate multiple devices in a user's room.
> I feed the DHCP information into my bandwidth management platform to enforce
> different levels (i.e. speeds) of service per user depending on what they've
> purchased.
>
> I have yet to come up with a viable solution to do all of the above in IPv6
> without using DHCPv6. At the moment, that means that OSX users are not going
> to get IPv6.
Have you *asked* your vendors for a alternate solution?
DHCP kills privacy addresses.
DHCP kills CGAs.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
