Hi all,
Here is my summary from an online discussion. We know this affect alot of
different things, RFCs, documents, not to forget many religious views, but
_try_ to put all that aside for a while...
We all think it's time to address this reoccurring issue and discussion on
RAs and DHCP. RA
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
supply default gateway independing of RAs or no RAs. That is a client
should be able to get only in a IPv6 only network _if_ there is no RAs,
only DHCP there.
Why? What problem are you solving by changing the current behavior?
DHCP must support
hey,
Why? What problem are you solving by changing the current behavior?
We propose to decouple DHCP from RA, view them as two different
autoconfiguration protocols. Today you can't deploy DHCP without RA and
this forces you to support/secure two protocols that mostly overlap.
Personally
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 03:41:58PM +0100, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
It should be possible to have a network running DHCP without any RA, if
someone wants to do that. As far as I know, and you need RAs in todays
world because DHCPv6 can not give out defaultroute. It break the
standard if it
On 28/dic/2013, at 17:36, Hannes Frederic Sowa han...@stressinduktion.org
wrote:
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 03:41:58PM +0100, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
It should be possible to have a network running DHCP without any RA, if
someone wants to do that. As far as I know, and you need RAs in todays
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 05:57:14PM +0100, Marco Sommani wrote:
On 28/dic/2013, at 17:36, Hannes Frederic Sowa han...@stressinduktion.org
wrote:
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 03:41:58PM +0100, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
It should be possible to have a network running DHCP without any RA, if
On Sat, 28 Dec 2013, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
did you see the start of my mail?
Yes.
It should be possible to have a network running DHCP without any RA, if
someone wants to do that.
Why?
Because I want to isn't a good technical answer.
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se