[141667] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Franklin)
Fri Jun 10 08:49:10 2011
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 13:48:21 +0100 (BST)
From: Tim Franklin <tim@pelican.org>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <EMEW3|2df82e6153e3a65d86db281960872724n59Bf403tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|A0223685-F464-45D9-B286-631E1E6669ED@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> Standing back a little, I can see an argument that IPv6 would be an
> easier 'sell' if there were two modes of operation, one with only
> RAs, and one with only DHCPv6.
This +1.
There are plenty of enterprises, employing actual network engineers (allegedly), who are just about getting to grips with CIDR and VLSM. They are *thinking* about reconfiguring their hosts to stop having 10.x.x.x/8 as the interface address, and letting proxy-arp on the routers worry about which subnets are which. They *might* have been convinced that an ATM cloud (or sometimes even MPLS!) has robust traffic separation, and they don't need a full mesh of leased lines any more.
IPv6 is hugely scary as it is, without breaking their "hosts and host info" / "routers and routing info" silo model. Not all of the networking world runs on Internet time :(
Regards,
Tim.
