The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
bicknell at ufp.org
Fri Jun 10 13:47:44 UTC 2011
In a message written on Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:37:11AM -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
> You really didn't just write an entire post saying that RA is bad
> because if a moron of a network engineer plugs an incorrectly
> configured device into a production network it may cause problems, did
No, I posed the easiest way to recreate this issue.
I've seen the entire NANOG and IETF lans taken out because some
dork enabled microsoft connecting sharing to their cell card.
I've seen entire corporate networks taken out because someone ran
the patch cable to the wrong port.
The point is, RA's are operationally fragile and DHCP is operationally
robust. You can choose to stick your head in the sand about that
if you want, but it's still true.
Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the NANOG