Le 22/07/2015 13:52, David Lamparter a écrit :
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 01:44:52PM +0200, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
Do you need DHCPv4 Subnet Allocation and/or IPv4 Router Advertisements
(RFC6656 and RFC1256)?
hncp-07 section 7.4 says:
[...] The winner is the router (connected to the Common Link)
advertising the greatest L-capability. [...] The elected router MUST
provide DHCPv4 services on the given link.
Sounds as if you actually want a "The elected router MAY provide DHCPv4
service on the given link, and only until year 2020".?
Or maybe you want to have an RFC today to be able to update it in a few
years time? (remove the MUST).
hncp-07 section 10 says on the election:
[...] between 1 and 7 included (4 is the default) if the router is
capable of running a legacy DHCPv4 server offering IPv4 addresses to
clients and 0 otherwise. [...]
So, L=0 implies the router can't do a DHCPv4 server. And if you have a
link where all routers have L=0, there will not be DHCPv4 on that link.
(Which is, I guess, how you would do sunset4?)
You seem to be saying that '0' is somehow a priviledged value. Maybe
make _that_ a 'default' (not '4') and make _that_ a MUST?
Not sure if any of this is changing in -08; I do agree with Alexandru
in that there is a need for a mechanism to ditch IPv4 for individual
v6-only devices or complete v6-only homenets.
YEs, trying to set my mind about this being IPv6-only in a brief time,
and IPv4 still there, but not in the way.
IPv6 is default, the doc should read mainly IPv6, IPv4 in the appendix,
or as exceptional additional documents for those who really need it.
Just some comments...
NB: Prefix assignment is a different question.
I agree.
Alex
-David
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
