IPv6 Confusion

Jack Bates jbates at brightok.net
Wed Feb 18 23:45:47 UTC 2009

Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Who says the IPv6 solutions need to be better than IPv4?

I think that IPv6 solutions will automatically be better than IPv4 based 
on the switch to multicast for handling things. That being said, I 
haven't seen the normal IPv4 solutions migrated to IPv6 as of yet in the 
products I currently use.

I honestly believe that a majority of the debate is mute, in that IPv6 
*has* some L2 security stuff written up (which I don't believe they did 
with IPv4). Once vendors implement them, things will be on par. The only 
issue I've heard of is that DHCPv6 doesn't support handing out a router, 
which is in draft (and DHCPv6 is very clear that it only covers a base 
set and additional RFCs will be necessary for more options). RA should 
still be the switch that says SLAAC or DHCPv6, even if it isn't used for 
the option of routing.

As said elsewhere in the thread, vendors will do what they feel they 
need to do, with or without an RFC. IOS, for example, doesn't support 
IA_TA or IA_NA at this time. It's in the DHCPv6 spec, though.


More information about the NANOG mailing list