Misconceptions, was: IPv6 RA vs DHCPv6 - The chosen one?

Cameron Byrne cb.list6 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 29 06:59:20 CST 2011


On Dec 29, 2011 6:38 AM, "Ray Soucy" <rps at maine.edu> wrote:
>
> Sounds like we have one group saying that IPv6 is too complicated and
> that all the "overhead" of IPv6 had resulted in slow adoption.
>
> Meanwhile we have others saying it doesn't have enough functionality,
> and should also include IGP.
>
> Seems like IPv6 as it is has struck a balance somewhere in the middle.
>  It's never going to be the perfect solution for every situation.
>
> There is a lot of academic and theoretical argument being made here,
> but not so much on the practical application side.  I think this
> discussion went down hill when we started seeing people point to
> "evidence" that IPv6 is "broken" being special use cases that IPv4
> can't even handle properly.
>
>

Yep.  How about you guys take this nonsense off list.

The first post was well intentioned, the rest has been FUD and sour
grapes.

Next topic, ethernet is too chaotic and inefficient to deploy and support
mission critical applications in LAN or WAN or data center.

Cb.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Vitkovsky, Adam
> <avitkovsky at emea.att.com> wrote:
> >
> > (*) If you think I'm going to run an IGP on some of my file servers when
> > "default route to the world out the public 1G interface, and 5 static
routes
> > describing the private 10G network" is actually the *desired* semantic
because
> > if anybody re-engineers the 10G net enough to make me change the
routes, I have
> > *other* things to change as well, like iptables entries and
/etc/exports and so
> > on.  I don't *want* an IGP changing that stuff around wiithout the
liveware
> > taking a meeting to discuss deployment of the change.
> >
> >
> > Well the only reason why you still have a good night sleep with the
primary path in flames and all those in stone carved static routes is that
your server is connected via ether channel to a couple of boxes with dual
RPs and redundant power supplies running VSS or vPC and routers running vrrp
> > All of this just because the end station just can't route around a
failed link
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Ray Soucy
>
> Epic Communications Specialist
>
> Phone: +1 (207) 561-3526
>
> Networkmaine, a Unit of the University of Maine System
> http://www.networkmaine.net/
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list