Ian, > Optional is fine. Removal gives us a hole in the solution. > > Currently, we¹ve got lw4o6 deployed as a PoC using a fixed binding between > v6 addr, v4 + ports. As a solution for this particular problem, it works > and provisioning this over DHCPv6 would be much simpler than needing > DHCPv4 over X (which we currently have to use as it¹s the only defined and > implemented lw4o6 provisioning DHCPv4 based mechanism). > > Removing OPTION_S46_IPV4ADDRESS effectively means that there needs to be > mandatory support for something else. Adding in DHCPv4overDHCPv6 or PCP > (if you don¹t need it) increases the cruft.
if optional, we have to think through the corner cases: - how does a CPE know when to initiate DHCPv4 (or PCP)? - can a CPE end up with an IPv4 address provisioned both with OPTION_S46_IPV4ADDRESS and DHCPv4 (and PCP)? - what does the CPE do with IPv4 addresses with longer lifetimes than the softwire? I'm sure there are more. keeping choice down makes for a simpler solution. cheers, Ole
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
