James Carlson wrote:
....Router Advertisements Unlike DHCPv4, DHCPv6 is expected to be invoked by Router Advertisements (RAs), rather than by manual configuration (see RFC 2462). When the system receives an RA with the ``M'' ("managed address configuration") bit set, the system should automatically invoke DHCPv6 on that interface and use it to get an address and other parameters. The ``O'' ("other stateful configuration") bit indicates whether the system should only request data other than an address (e.g., DNS servers) via DHCPv6. If either bit is set, we must run DHCPv6. When triggered by way of RA, we acquire an address lease only if the ``M'' bit is set.
Will Solaris be enforcing the "must" and "should" words in the above two paragraphs? That is, if a system has been manually configured for a network and then receives a message indicating that it should/must use DHCPv6, will it then over ride the existing configuration params?
... Interoperability Several different servers need to be checked out, including Wide-DHCP, Dibbler, and (if available) ISC's.
Is Cisco relevant here?
Comparisons TBD: need to check how Linux configures DHCPv6. Based on the documentation, it doesn't look like it conforms with the RFCs, because it doesn't seem to be controlled by the RA bits. Instead, it appears to be manually configured. Should also check other vendors (IBM, HP) if possible.
Microsoft? IPv6 appears to be a native part of XP and appears to always be enabled on an interface. Unless you take action to specifially disable it on a NIC, I think you would find it enabled by default on just about any XP PC. Is it worth mentioning anything about Zones in this document? Or, for that matter, stack instances? Darren _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
