On 2011-12-22 04:34, Sander Steffann wrote:
SLAAC + Stateless DHCPv6. I agree that a central Stateful DHCPv6 server is
too complex for such a situation, but come on: a stateless DHCPv6 server is
simple….
[Dacheng Zhang]
But in this case, we still need to deploy a server... If we can use RAs in such
environments, even a stateless DHCP server is not necessary. Please correct me
if I am wrong or miss anything.
Depends on how you see 'deploying a server'. Your router can easily perform the
stateless DHCPv6 server function. Even tiny CPEs can do that these days, and
Cisco has been doing that for ages.
Right. To me, this (a stateless DHCPv6 server function in the router device) is
what this draft has to compete against. The authors would have to demonstrate a
use case where this is not acceptable/feasible/sufficient.
Simon
--
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
