> 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.
Two issues with multiple methods to configure the same thing that
hasn't been brought up are:
- potential impact on time to discover
Since each router advertisement doesn't need to contain all
options will a host need to listen for RAs for some time
before it decides it to DHCPv6 to find the info?
- conflicting information
A host might use DHCPv6 for other reasons/other information.
What should it do if the RAs and the DHCPv6 reply contains
different DNS information?
What if different RAs received on the same interface contain
different DNS information?
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
