Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

Sat Jul 24 00:56:14 UTC 2010

On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 17:53 +0200, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
> > And I'm not saying to forget about what we have learn with DHCP, in
> > fact DHCPv6 has many new and good features, but for many reasons,
> > autonconfiguration is good enough, and much more simple.
> [...]
> For our scenarios DHCPv6 is needed, autoconfiguration is *not* good
> enough.
> [...]
> I see no point in repeating the arguments for why autoconfiguration
> is not good enough - this has been beaten to death, repeatedly, on
> lots of IPv6 lists.

It's not like "there can be only one".

If autoconf is good enough for your purposes, that's great! If not,
there's DHCP. That's great too! Or use autoconf AND stateless DHCP -
that's great too! Heck, some of us will be using static addressing in a
lot of places and that's great too. Most of us will be using all four
methods.

Understanding the advantages and limitations of each method and combo is
important, but just because something has a limitation doesn't make it
completely useless for everybody.

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: B386 7819 B227 2961 8301 C5A9 2EBC 754B CD97 0156
Old 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/20100724/f9e32a4a/attachment.sig>