DHCPv6, was: Re: IPv6 Finally gets off the ground

Fri Apr 13 19:48:35 UTC 2007

On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 11:11:54AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> I have a Cisco 2500 with software from 1999 and a Windows XP box with  
> software from 2001, both supporting IPv6, sitting here... I didn't  
> get my first Mac until 2002, but that one supported IPv6 at that  
> point, too.

It would be foolish to suggest that software implementing IPv6 has
not existed for many years.

It would also be foolish to use "support IPv6" as a blanket
statement, when the features have not truly been usable by more
than bearded geeks.

> There is a provisioning problem with IPv6, yes.

Note that the word 'provisioning' is more than just 'addressing'.

A given ISP may or may not directly communicate with end hosts
using any form of DHCP, but the current broadband ISP models which
are de rigeur would not be salient without DHCPv4 on the end hosts,
even if that is only between the set top box and customer.

So it might not be "their job", but it's still an important facet
of the architecture.  One could say that although a DHCP department
doesn't exist within ISP's, there would have been a need for a
staffed department in its absence.

I remember the era when we used to deliver "install" floppies to our
prospective customers.  And I can tell you they weren't a very good
idea.

Web pages full of instructions, flyers with "simple to follow" steps,
none of them really worked very well either.  Even if our iconic
mascots trying to make the instructions friendlier were awfully cute.

What DHCP and PPP did do, was to remove all of that, and make ISP
integration of customer premise something that could "just happen"
without any handholding or bearded geekery.

When you can plug your computer in, and automatically (with no
clicking) get an IPv6 address, have something tell you where your
DNS assist servers, configure web proxies, and solve your dynamic
dns problems (as IPv4 set top boxes do today), then I would allow
you the use of the words 'supports IPv6' rather than 'implements
IPv6'.

On the subject of DNS, I think you are going to find that, since
IPv6 addresses do not pass the 'phone test', IPv6 customers will
have a new emphasis on having their names in DNS.  But these are
forward looking statements, and it's equally possible that people
will be moved instead to use presence networks.

-- 
David W. Hankins	"If you don't do it right the first time,
Software Engineer		you'll just have to do it again."
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.	-- Jack T. Hankins
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20070413/ee1d4102/attachment.sig>