On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 5:25 AM, Lee Howard <l...@asgard.org> wrote: > > > On 12/20/13 8:07 AM, "Jamie Bowden" <ja...@photon.com> wrote: > > > > > > >> "Parity" isn't enough information; what features are missing? RA is > >>part > >> of IPv6, but you don't have to use SLAAC. > >> I'd say it's the DHC people who need to hear it, not the IPv6 people, > >>but > >> YMMV. > > > >I have a question. Why does DHCP hand out router, net mask, broadcast > >address, etc. in IPv4; why don't we all just use RIP and be done with it? > > > >You don't have to like how enterprise networks are built, but you better > >acknowledge that they are their own animal that have their own needs and > >drivers, and telling them that the way their networks are built are wrong > >and they need to change their whole architecture, separation of service, > >security model, etc. to fit your idea of perfection isn't winning > >friends. You are, however, influencing people. Perhaps not in the > >manner you intended. > > So there's an interesting question. You suggest there's a disagreement > between enterprise network operators and protocol designers. Who should > change? > > I used to run an enterprise network. It was very different from an ISP > network. I didn't say, "You're wrong!" I said, "What's missing?" >
default route information via DHCPv6. That's what I'm still waiting for. Matt