end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

David W. Hankins David_Hankins at isc.org
Tue Aug 24 15:42:39 CDT 2010


On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 04:41:56PM -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
> prefixes to the unnumbered interface. If you use dslam level controls, 
> you'll most likely being using DHCPv6 TA addressing with PD on top of it, 
> which works well. Most of which can support quick static/dynamic 
> capabilities as it does with v4.

This is surprising to me, can you comment on why DHCPv6 TA is being
used in this scenario?

-- 
David W. Hankins	BIND 10 needs more DHCP voices.
Software Engineer		There just aren't enough in our heads.
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.		http://bind10.isc.org/
-------------- 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/20100824/0754ae7c/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list