IPv6 Confusion

Tony Hain alh-ietf at tndh.net
Wed Feb 18 15:39:57 CST 2009


Leo Bicknell wrote:
> ...
> But, when DHCPv6 was developed the "great minds of the world" decided
> less functionality was better.  There /IS NO OPTION/ to send a default
> route in DHCPv6, making DHCPv6 fully dependant on RA's being turned on!
> So the IETF and other great minds have totally removed the capability
> for operators to work around this problem.

No, the decision was to not blindly import all the excess crap from IPv4. If
anyone has a reason to have a DHCPv6 option, all they need to do is specify
it. The fact that the *nog community stopped participating in the IETF has
resulted in the situation where functionality is missing, because nobody
stood up and did the work to make it happen.

Tony 








More information about the NANOG mailing list