Sheng, >> I think the argument given in the draft for operators wanting a >> DHCPv6-managed network without ND is flawed. >> ND is required for router discovery, neighbour discovery etc anyway. and a >> router on the link must be configured >> with the onlink prefix regardless. >> >> while we can clearly make this work, I don't think it is justified to create >> a >> duplicate mechanism for prefix discovery. >> section 3.2 RFC1958. > > Hi, Ole, > > Assuming all networks are using SLAAC is not right. > > In WiMAX NWG IPv6 spec, Revision 6, see the attachment. > > Stateful (DHCPv6) address configuration is supported. > Check Sections 5.11.11.4 and 5.11.12.2. > > Also, BBF document TR-177 supports stateful address configuration using > DHCPv6, check Section 4.2. > > I also know a few ISP desire to use DHCPv6 in their networks.
I make no assumption that all networks are using SLAAC for address assignment. there is no conflict between using ND for prefix assignment and DHCPv6 for address assignment. cheers, Ole -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
