6to4 is a whole different story. I'd prefer to avoid it unless there are
seriously compelling reasons to support it. I think dual stack is the
way to implement IPv6 support in Fuel.
--
Sean M. Collins
__
OpenStack Development
My biggest concern is about 4to6 translations. I would prefer to avoid them
as longer as it possible.
>From my point of view pure ipv6 is easier to implement than dual stack. I
see it like when you install Fuel node you decide once and forever what IP
version you are go with. We will have two impl
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 08:27:24PM EDT, Andrey Danin wrote:
> Hi, Sean,
>
> Dnsmasq is managed by Cobbler. Cobbler may also manage isc-dhcpd + BIND
> [0].
Great - thanks for the link.
> So, switching from dnsmasq requires 2 more services been installed. I
> think it's not a big deal to a update
Hi, Sean,
Dnsmasq is managed by Cobbler. Cobbler may also manage isc-dhcpd + BIND
[0]. So, switching from dnsmasq requires 2 more services been installed. I
think it's not a big deal to a update Cobbler container. The most work will
be in adding ipv6 support into everything: fuelmenu, Nailgun/UI,
Hi,
I wanted to ask if we have any opinions on dnsmasq, since I am doing
some hacking on adding IPv6 support to fuel, for the provisioning stage.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/216787/
Depending on if dnsmasq supports DHCPv6 options for PXE booting, we may
need to investigate replacing it with
