[195984] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: DHCPv6-PD -> Lack of route injection in RFC
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mohamed.boucadair@orange.com)
Mon Sep 25 10:50:18 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
To: Steve Teusch <steve.teusch@rtr.guru>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 12:11:34 +0000
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR10MB1647A9D9F8562FAA66666B22F6670@MWHPR10MB1647.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Dear Steve,=20
We used to have this in the IETF: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dh=
c-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt-03 and https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-=
relay-route-pd-problem-00.=20
We abandoned that effort because there wasn't sufficient support for it at =
that time.=20
Cheers,
Med
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De=A0: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+mohamed.boucadair=3Dorange.com@nanog.o=
rg]
> De la part de Steve Teusch
> Envoy=E9=A0: vendredi 22 septembre 2017 09:12
> Cc=A0: nanog@nanog.org
> Objet=A0: DHCPv6-PD -> Lack of route injection in RFC
>=20
> I am running into venders that do not support injection of a delegated
> route when operating as a DHCPv6 relay (or server for that matter).
> Brocade supports this, but I am not finding this as part of any of the
> RFC's. This is to deliver home ISP service, so it is very important or
> return packets won't go to the client unless the route is manually added
> as a routing protocol is not an option. There should be a MUST activity
> for this somewhere.
>=20
> Anyone know what gives?
