IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

Wed Oct 21 22:40:49 UTC 2009

On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 21:42 +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 18 okt 2009, at 5:51, Karl Auer wrote:
> > Do the advertisements "right", advise sysadmins that hosts should  
> > not do SLAAC,
> 
> Doesn't it tell you something that you're fighting this hard to avoid  
> hosts from doing what comes naturally?

Well, I would not personally disable SLAAc except perhaps on specific
machines for specific reasons. If I was using exclusively DHCPv6 I might
disable the appropriate RA flags, and I would then expect my hosts to
not do SLAAC. Any host that did would be broken, IMHO.

> It occurs to me that I haven't met anyone who uses the term "SLAAC"  
> who uses IPv6 in a way that I would consider normal. (Or at all.)

Ah well, it's always the exception that proves the rule.

Sadly the term "stateless autoconfiguration" got overloaded, so now we
have it meaning very different things - a) generating your own address
from RA information; and b) getting only ancillary information from a
DHCPv6 server.

Regards, K.

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karl Auer (kauer at biplane.com.au)                   +61-2-64957160 (h)
http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/                  +61-428-957160 (mob)

GPG fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20091022/31b0d1ae/attachment.sig>