IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

Thu Oct 22 10:27:48 UTC 2009

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:02:14PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 22 okt 2009, at 01:55, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> 
> >	so your not a fan of the smart edge and the stupid network.
> 
> I'm a fan of getting things right. A server somewhere 5 subnets away  
> doesn't really know what routers are working on my subnet. It can take  
> a guess and then wait for people to complain and then an admin to fix  
> stuff if the guess is wrong, but I wouldn't call that a "smart edge".
> 
> Always learn information from the place where it's actually known.

	i'm ok w// that mindset.

	one should learn routing from the router(s),
	time from the time servers,
	DNS from the DNS servers,
	etc...

	now -normally- I would expect the router to focus on
	forwarding packets ... not be the time keeper, DNS server,
	handing out IP addresses,  hosting content for the HTTP protocol etc.

	sounds to me like your reacting to a particular style of 
	implementation (DHCP servers being multi-hops away) and want
	to move the function(s) closer to the edge, e.g. in the routers.

	and if we can get RA/ND -fixed- to accomodate all the functions that
	folks have grown to depend on over the years from a configuration service
	like DHCP - then we should be able to converge.  

	I am not a fan of the way DHCPv6 has developed/emerged.  And yes,
	I've re-written both client and server to fix the egergious problems 
	found in the current spec... (it now works just fine for doing things
	like handing out DNS servers for resolvers,  picking mapped addresses
	for my IVI service, etc.)   so my DHCP is non-interoperable w/ anyone
	elses.

	Thing is, its easier to fix DHCP code than to fix the router code.

	And the edge is not the LAN, its the device.


--bill