DHCPv6 PD chains vs bridging

David W. Hankins David_Hankins at isc.org
Tue May 5 15:38:17 CDT 2009


On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 04:22:04PM -0400, Paul Timmins wrote:
> Sorry for the top post, but as a crazy thought here, why not throw out an 
> RA, and if answered, go into transparent bridge mode? Let the sophisticated 
> users who want routed behavior override it manually.

Customer premise gear has a 'front side' and a 'back side', and it is
already well ingrained behaviour for 'back-to-back port chaining' to
create a single large bridged network in the home.  What is the
customer's anticipated result from front-to-back chaining?

That seems much more reliable a hint to me than conditional behaviour.


DHCPv6 PD is applicable to the ISP customer premise.  DHCPv6 PD
'chaining' however is probably only applicable in some promised future
where there are alternative home network medias to Ethernet, or to the
Enterprise where the boundaries drawn in broadcast domains are
administrative in nature and not technical (but still, all automated).

-- 
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: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20090505/8cf20043/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list