Francis, Catching up on old mail I saved for DHCPv6. Let me just start with your view is wrong. I don't see the point of arguing with you. DHCPv6 will be deployed and widely used. So will stateless. Its not an IETF discussion worth having in this vein IMO. You have your opinion and thats fine. Many of us who also have implemented IPv6, talking to customers, and working with the market think you are 100% wrong. They want DHCPv6.
/jim > -----Original Message----- > From: Francis Dupont [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 11:55 AM > To: Dr. Subrata Goswami > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: PPP and Global Addresses > > > In your previous mail you wrote: > > Mr. Dupont, DHCP originally started with allowing dynamic > IP address allocation. A secondary benefit of utility is in > network operations, it is impossible to manually assign IP > address to 100's of hosts let alone 1,000,000's that IPv6 > would allow. This about a large network operator, how are they > going to manage their asset of IP address pool - send a person > to manually configure each host, that is silly. > > => RFC 2462 "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration". > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
