Hi Ralph,
I was just commenting that the addressing policy changes triggered by
routing changes are best initiated by the router and all the other
policy changes are best initiated by the DHCP server. I was not
commenting on the suitability/ease of use of the delivery mechanism(s)
at all.
Thanks
Suresh
On 09-11-09 08:58 PM, Ralph Droms wrote:
In the discussion of IPv6 address selection , Dave Thaler asked me to
comment on this bullet from slide 10:
* DHCP option
- Hard to kick policy reconfigure by a server.
Not wanting to contribute to yet another iteration of the RA-vs-DHCP
debate, I'm responding through the mailing list. DHCPv6 has an
explicit mechanism, required by RFC 3315, in which a server can
asynchronously trigger a DHCPv6 message exchange from the client.
Suresh commented that the router might be a better source of updates
in some circumstances, when the selection policy is modified by
changes in the routing infrastructure as propagated by routing
protocols. I haven't thought about that scenario and can't comment...
- Ralph
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
