I agree there is no added value to have two ways to do the same thing. I guess the discussion here is whether lw46 should use dhcpv4-over-dhcpv6 or OPTION_S46_IPV4ADDRESS option in map-dhcp. No matter what we decide, we should only need one. I tend to agree with Ole to take out S46 option from the map-dhcp and let the map-dhcp draft focus on map.
On 11/1/13 9:50 AM, "Ted Lemon" <[email protected]> wrote: >On Nov 1, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Ole Troan <[email protected]> wrote: >> if we follow the principle of DHCPv6 is used to provision the >>link-layer (aka tunnel), >> DHCPv4 is used to configure the IPv4 protocol. then I wonder if we >>shouldn't really >> _only_ use DHCPv4 for LW46 IPv4 configuration. does that make sense? > >DHCPv6 would still deliver the AFTR address, right? I don't personally >see a lot of value in having two ways of delivering the IPv4 address for >lw4over6, but maybe the authors can explain? > >_______________________________________________ >Softwires mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
