IPv6 Confusion

Nathan Ward nanog at daork.net
Wed Feb 18 20:55:09 UTC 2009

On 19/02/2009, at 9:42 AM, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:

>>> 2) Some end-node box with a IPv6 stack from "Joe's Software Emporium
>>> and
>>> Bait-n-Tackle" sees an RA packet, and concludes that since RA and
>>> DHCPv6
>>> are mutually exclusive, to ignore any DHCPv6 packets it sees, and
>>> hilarity
>>> ensues.
>> They are not mutually exclusive, DHCPv6 *requires* RA.
> In your previous Nanog message you said:
>> DHCPv6 can operate without RA now.
> Please make up your mind.

You are right, sorry for any confusion, I will clarify my comments.

DHCPv6 can operate without RA, but you cannot get default route  
information right now. I believe there is a draft to add this option  

In most networks this is not practical, as many hosts with a DHCPv6  
stack will send DHCPv6 requests only when RA messages tell them to us  
a DHCPv6 server.

The DHCPv6 protocol does not require RA, however practical  
implementation of DHCPv6 for address assignment does.

Better? :-)

Nathan Ward

More information about the NANOG mailing list