Sorry for the extremely late reply (it's been over a month!), but I'm only slowly recovering from a massive mail backlog.
>>> it occurs to me that AHCP might be a better choice than the >>> alternatives for use in Amateur Radio internet environments with IPv6. >> Why do you need IPV6 for HAM use > Two reasons come to mind - I'm sure there are more. Another reason is that a number of things are much easier to implement in IPv6. This is especially true of link-local stuff, which is highly non-portable in IPv4, and quite reasonable in IPv4. That's the main reason why I never bothered defining AHCP over IPv4 -- the current implementation of AHCP is almost completely portable POSIX code, while a typical DHCPv4 implementation needs to manually craft IP packets and push them through a raw socket. (The Babel protocol is defined over both IPv4 and IPv6, has it's only ever been implemented over link-local IPv6. Note that that it can advertise IPv4 routes, it just happens to carry them over IPv6.) In short -- IPv6 helps keeping the developers sane. And that's hopefully worth a few wasted bits here and there. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ Cerowrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
