Le 20/10/2012 18:36, [email protected] a écrit :
There is also the question of availability of DHCP software on
smaller platforms which have no SIM card. It may be easier to do
this with ND in smaller settings.
The obvious conclusion to this argument is that a *lot* of DHCP
functionality will be duplicated in ND. Is this where we want to go?
I guess yes, and vice-versa.
I'm coming from the DHCP side of the argument. In my world DHCP is
needed because it gives you a single place to handle dynamic address
allocation, *and* it ties in with all sorts of support & backend
systems.
Well yes, when that backend is a fixed infrastructure with things
planned, highly human assisted. But in a dynamic yet simple network
(without assistance of various backend) it's hard to use DHCP: a Relay
can't 'discover' a Server, a Relay can hardly become a Server upon
network change, etc.
I am against adding lots of new ND functionality until we have DHCPv6
that is considerably more feature complete. Some of this is probably
coming (client MAC address), some of it is still being opposed for
mostly religious reasons (e.g. running DHCP without RA).
As a side note, running DHCP without RA has significant advantages in
machine-class devices. The memory constraint may lead to select one
among the two to implement, not the two in the same small memory.
In the same class, one may also prefer _just_ ND; but it does not give
it enough functionality to establish IP.
Alex
Steinar Haug, AS 2116
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
