[141824] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roesen)
Sun Jun 12 06:36:36 2011
Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:35:44 +0200
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <6F4A16E2-5401-4182-948A-E78C32D619F3@delong.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:12:26PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> You must have RA to at least tell you:
> Default Router
> Go ask the DHCP server (M and/or O bit)
>
> As it currently stands, an RFC-compliant host will not attempt to solicit
> a DHCP response unless it receives an RA with the M inclusive-or O bits
> set.
RFC 4862 seems to acknowledge otherwise:
5.5.2. Absence of Router Advertisements
Even if a link has no routers, the DHCPv6 service to obtain addresses
may still be available, and hosts may want to use the service.[...]
Could you point to any RFC which implies or explicitly states that
DHCPv6 MUST NOT be used in absence of RA with M and/or O=1?
Regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
