Jonathan: I think that Ralph answered clearly on the DHCP question. For memory (Ralph correct me please if I fail to word that correctly):
We still do stateless autoconf and the node comes up with its address and publishes it. DHCP has a different model whereby the address is owned and delegated by the server. Cheers, Pascal >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Hui >Sent: mardi 10 novembre 2009 02:57 >To: Carsten Bormann >Cc: 6lowpan >Subject: Re: [6lowpan] 4861 usage in LLNs > > >On Nov 9, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > >> Again, entirely getting rid of a function is always the best >> optimization. >> Can we do that for DAD? > >The *need* for DAD is the core question for me. As specified within >6lowpan-nd now, IPv6 addresses are maintained using a centralized >protocol. That protocol looks and smells like DHCP - there's request/ >response, lease times, relays. The whiteboard may also >administratively assign addresses. So in the end, it's not clear to >me why we would need to *detect* duplicates when we essentially >*avoid* them from the beginning. > >I've voiced my comment several times over the past 1+ years and >presented a draft that argues for the use of optimized DHCP in Dublin, >so this is not new from my end. The fact that the current 6lowpan-nd >document has evolved towards using DHCP-like mechanisms is not an >accident. But if what we do is DHCP-like, it would seem to make sense >to utilize existing DHCP infrastructure rather than defining something >new. > >-- >Jonathan Hui > >_______________________________________________ >6lowpan mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
