IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?

James M Keller jmkeller at houseofzen.org
Thu Dec 22 16:55:04 UTC 2011

On 12/21/2011 11:28 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Ravi Duggal <raviduggal2906 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> We thus have draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-default-router-00 that extends
>> DHCPv6 to do what RA does. And now, we have
>> draft-bcd-6man-ntp-server-ra-opt-00.txt that extends RA to advertise
>> the NTP information that is currently done via DHCPv6.
>> My question is, that which then is the more preferred option for the
>> operators?
> "Yes."
> We want both. We'll try both. And in a couple years when the
> percentage Internet use of IPv6 is out of the single digits, we'll let
> you know what worked in which situations.
> We probably don't need one configuration protocol to rule them all.
> IPv4 has PAP/CHAP over PPP and DHCP over Ethernet plus a number of
> more minor ones like bootp (DHCP's semi-compatible predecessor) and
> rarp. We really don't suffer for the choice.
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
Yes +1

I would consider RA+SLAAC for residential/hotel/company guest, etc.  
Any place you don't care about host configuration tracking,
authentication, accounting, etc.  

DHCPv6 for fully managed environments with NAC / Auditing
requirements.   DHCPv6 would let you control per host/host class which
router(s) on the network to use explicitly, vs RA with just preferences
for each router.  Both should be able to provide the same type of
information, and let the administrators choose which deployment method
meets the requirements for their environment. 

James M Keller

More information about the NANOG mailing list