Mac OS X 10.7, still no DHCPv6

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Sun Feb 27 17:17:06 CST 2011


On Feb 27, 2011, at 2:39 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:

> 
> In message <20110227204511.GM27578 at virtual.bogons.net>, Simon Lockhart writes:
>> On Mon Feb 28, 2011 at 07:22:08AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
>>>> This is often required for legislation compliance. DHCP does this well.
>>> 
>>> Does it really matter what address a customer has as long as it comes from
>>> the /64, /56 or /48 assigned to them?
>> 
>> You are assuming an access technology that lends itself to subnet-per-custome
>> r.
>> 
>> I run a network with 50,000+ end users using ethernet-based access to the
>> user's room. In IPv4, I run 1 or more subnets per building (depending on the 
>> number of rooms in the build). I use DHCP to assign IPs, and record the 
>> DHCP assignments allow me to trace users in the event of abuse complaints. I
>> use DHCP Option82 to allow me to correlate multiple devices in a user's room.
>> I feed the DHCP information into my bandwidth management platform to enforce
>> different levels (i.e. speeds) of service per user depending on what they've
>> purchased.
>> 
>> I have yet to come up with a viable solution to do all of the above in IPv6
>> without using DHCPv6. At the moment, that means that OSX users are not going
>> to get IPv6.
> 
> Have you *asked* your vendors for a alternate solution?
> 
> DHCP kills privacy addresses.

In many environments, this is a feature, not a bug.

> DHCP kills CGAs.
> 
In many environments, this is a feature, not a bug.

I would, in fact, posit that some of the people complaining about the lack of
DHCP are doing so precisely because of a desire to kill these things in their
environment.

Owen





More information about the NANOG mailing list