Hi all,
> > With all due respect, I think this is short sighted. Today you almost > > cannot buy a DSL router for home use that doesn't have an integrated > > DHCP server, among all kinds of other strange stuff. To make a future > > equivalents of such devices also talk DHCPv6 is clearly possible. > > Sure. But that's then still a lot of DHCP code for just DNS discovery > (if DNS discovery is all that is required of the DHCPv6 server, and the > node doesn't need other DHCPv6 options). My major concern about DHCP for DNS discovery will be deployment of DHCPv6 servers. How long will it be before the IETF deploys DHCPv6 at meetings? Already, at a number of IETF meetings, I have had IPv6 addresses, but because of DHCP problems (client and server problems), I have been unable to get IPv4 addresses & DNS server addresses. It breaks down to this, if I want to deploy IPv6 nodes, can I count on DHCPv6 servers being out in the networks? I am not debating or commenting on the DHCPv6 at all, what I am saying is that in the absense of working DHCPv6 servers, I would like a fall-back. If we have statefull address autoconfig & stateful address autoconfig, I think having an additional mechanism for getting DNS server addresses is not a bad thing. At the transport layer, we have UDP, UDP-lite, DCCP, TCP, SCTP ... to transfer packets. Having multiple ways to do something is a reasonable solution. John -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
