too bad we could not reach consensus on DNS dicovery. i will do
IPv6 tutorial at LACNIC next week, and again i will need to tell
participants that there's no standard mechanism for DNS server
configuration.
(assuming that we're to pick one mechanism)
one thing that is misunderstood in the meeting was, nothing prevents
people from running mechanism that wasn't picked. for instance, even
if dhcpv6-lite is picked, 802.11-based SIP cellphone and its network
can still run RA-based mechanism. the SIP cellphone may need to
implement dhcpv6-lite client as well so that it visits normal 802.11
network (such as starbucks), but nothing prevents you from implementing
such SIP cellphone. i guess mobile-ip people (who favors RA-based
approach) objected because they felt that they will be forced to run
dhcpv6-lite. that is not true.
given that, my proposal is to pick dhcpv6-lite as the default mechanism
to be used. with reading the previous paragraph, could those who
favors RA-based approach hum for dhcpv6-lite?
itojun
#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
