> In the particular case of default route, the existing mechanism to > achieve this is ND. This has the optional feature to communicate the > MAC address of the default router at the same time. This saves on the > number of messages exchanged (instead of 4 messages, only 2 are used).
In environments where this is a significant amount of additional traffic, presumably ND will be the preferred mechanism for delivering the default route. > In the same manner, it would be useful to have DHCPv6 way of > communicating the default route to add the MAC address of the IP address > of the default router. This would save on the number of messages exchanged. I think this is an unnecessary optimization. What's the use case where both ND is not preferred, and bandwidth is so constrained as to make this a problem? _______________________________________________ mif mailing list mif@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif
