v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)]

TJ trejrco at gmail.com
Mon Feb 9 20:47:15 CST 2009


>Why would anyone NOT want that?? what replaces that option in current RA
>deployments?

One nit - I like to differentiate between the presence of RAs (which should
be every user where IPv6 is present) and the use of SLAAC (RA + prefix).


Right now - Cheat off of IPv4's config.
(Lack of DHCPv6 client-side support, and lack of DNS v6 transport (WinXP),
necessitate this)

Hopefully soon - RFC5006.
Around the same timeframe - DHCPv6 (stateful or stateless, doesn't matter).






More information about the NANOG mailing list