As a data point, in our network we: - do run both SLAAC and DHCPv6 - we send RDNSS info over SLAAC - we do provide both IPv4 and IPv6 DNSes via DHCP (v4 and v6 respectively)
Now it’s less so as we’ve been upgrading machines, but we used to get a significant amount of AAAA queries over v4 coming mostly from Windows machines. I don’t think running both SLAAC and DHCPv6 is a big deal. It’s weird, and it goes against one’s sense of ‘what should be right’, but in practice, it’s not really a problem. cheers! -Carlos > On Jun 20, 2016, at 3:23 PM, Daniel Shaw <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 20 Jun 2016, at 9:59 PM, Mukom Akong T. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Most of the complaints about deploying IPv6 to users have been around >> needing to do both SLAAC and DHCPv6 in a normal network. Reasons being >> >> - Microsoft has refused to implement RFC 6106 (the ability to provision DNS >> information using RAs) in its Operating Systems >> >> - Google has refused to implement DHCPv6 client in Android > > Thanks for sharing - I learned something this evening. > > I’m also curious what other folk’s issue is with doing SLAAC and DHCPv6 > concurrently though? > > Regards, > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > AfrIPv6-Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/afripv6-discuss _______________________________________________ AfrIPv6-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/afripv6-discuss
