In your previous mail you wrote: I have to jump in here - DHCPv6 is *not* just for dynamic address allocation. Have those who are claiming that DHCPv6 will not be used actually read the spec?
=> I read the spec (one of the statements I used in a message to Jim is from the introduction of the draft). My concern is the primary objective of DHCPv6 is the dynamic address allocation, and a protocol which can fulfill all other functions should be far simpler. It will be used for other configuration parameters, as described in draft-droms-dnsconfig-dhcpv6-01.txt Arguments that DHCPv6 has no utility because of stateless address autoconfiguration are bogus. => the issue of DNS configuration is solved by another protocol. You can disagree with the DT conclusions (or the principle of DTs) but they propose a dedicated simpler protocol. DHCPv6 has to drag the dynamic address allocation ball & chain and shall ever be far more complex than any other solution for "additional configuration". Once again, stateless address autoconfiguration is great. But it's not enough. An IPv6 host needs *at least* DNS configuration information to be useful. => this is why a design team had to look for a solution. DHCPv6 is a reasonable way to provide that additional configuration information. => I strongly disagree and it seems my opinion is shared by many persons in the IPv6 WG (at the exception of Jim). Is there a buzz from network designers, managers or admins - folks who actually *run* networks and who understand IPv6 - asking for DHCP to go away? => we don't ask for DHCPv6 to go away. DHCPv6 is simply not here and for the addressing point of view stateless autoconfiguration proved it was enough. Regards [EMAIL PROTECTED] PS: I worked many years on DHCPv6 so I believe I won the right to express my opinion: I was tired to try to save DHCPv6 (to find another usage/utility) for instance so now I've given up. BTW at the interim meeting I was the only person who tried to make DHCPv6 an option for prefix delegation (it was my last attempt) and *nobody* voted in favor of it. (cf http://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/html/minutes/ipng-meeting-may2001.txt) -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
