[147878] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Masataka Ohta)
Sat Dec 24 03:56:46 2011
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 17:58:32 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
To: Michael Sinatra <michael@rancid.berkeley.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4EF58B34.6000904@rancid.berkeley.edu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Michael Sinatra wrote:
>> DHCPv6 works over link layers with unreliable multicast
>> better than ND.
>
> You still need ND to provide the link-layer address resolution (i.e. the
> IPv6 equivalent of ARP), even with DHCPv6.
Not necessarily. You can use ARP and DHCPv6 and you don't have
to waste time and power for DAD.
> Moreover, how do you come to
> the conclusion that DHCPv6, which uses multicast for the solicitation,
> is more reliable over links where multicast is unreliable?
DHCPv6 (and ARP) uses a lot less multicast/broadcast than ND.
> FYI, I have been using SLAAC over 802.11 for many years, and have
> supported large 802.11 installations with SLAAC and have never had a
> problem related to "unreliable multicast" on that medium. Other
> problems, yes. But not that one.
That's because your 802.11 is not congested.
Masataka Ohta
