Alexandru - you've used a phrase that I still don't understand. What
does it mean for a node to have a prefix that "it can reuse [...] for itself
and for others"?
- Ralph
-----Original Message-----
From: Alexandru Petrescu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thu 8/24/2006 11:51 AM
To: Bernie Volz (volz)
Cc: IETF IPv6 Mailing List; Ralph Droms (rdroms)
Subject: Re: Prefix Delegation using ICMPv6
Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
>> If we're to compare, I'd compare the ICMPv6-PD effort with the RA
> option
>> to carry DNS Server effort. If things are to evolve quicker then
>> we could skip some intermediary steps.
>
> Exactly. Why have two ways to the same thing! That's another effort
> that should be terminated.
>
> Gee, why don't we just encapsulate DHCPv6 options in RA/RS? Then,
> we'd solve all of these problems and be able to get rid of "DHCPv6".
Right, encapsulating DHCPv6 options in RA/RS would transform RA/RS into
DHCPv6 itself. RS/RA is the first thing people see when they come to
IPv6. It's so magic that it seems to be able to solve many problems.
It's a common temptation to add stuff into RA. That said.
We could try to document what are the current options to convey a prefix
to a terminal such that it can reuse that prefix for itself and for others.
Alex
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
