[148522] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: How are you doing DHCPv6 ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Roesen)
Tue Jan 17 18:37:58 2012
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:37:01 +0100
From: Daniel Roesen <dr@cluenet.de>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <3957a03c-881d-46aa-a26a-862d1f7dfa58@zimbra.network1.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 06:19:28PM -0500, Randy Carpenter wrote:
> > You might want to give this a read:
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-redundancy-consider-02.txt
>
> That doesn't really help us if we want to deploy before that draft
> becomes a standard.
Well, it more or less just presents options (workarounds for missing
proper HA sync).
> Are there any DHCPv6 servers currently that actually function in a
> fashion that is suitable for service providers?
Without specifying your requirements, that's hard to say. If you're
looking for fully state-sync'ed DHCPv6 server HA, I'm not aware of any.
Cisco unfortunately pushed that another year into the future for CNR, so
we're resorting for now to the "Split Prefixes" model described in
abovementioned draft, effectively halving our DHCPv6-PD pools and thus
exacerbates the negative effects of RIPE's overly converservative
policy (HD-Ratio 0.94) on IPv6 by effectively stealing one bit (half
the address space) just for redundancy. :-(
Best regards,
Daniel
--
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
