The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
Iljitsch van Beijnum
iljitsch at muada.com
Wed Jun 15 05:56:07 UTC 2011
On 15 jun 2011, at 7:33, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Bottom line, I expect it's easier to get cooperation from OS vendors and BIOS vendors to make changes
> because experience has shown that they are more willing to do so than vertical software vendors.
> As such, yes, I'd like to see some harmless extensions added to DHCPv6 that solve some real world
BTW, as long as you're making harmless changes: not putting a hard line end just _after_ 80 characters would make your messages easier to read.
As established before, all of this is not harmless and OS vendors (not sure what you're talking about with BIOS) aren't all that willing to make changes, at least not on short timescales.
It seems to me that the easiest solution to work around broken IPv4-only software isn't messing with the IPv6 protocol stack, but to create an IPv4 overlay on top of IPv6 that seems like a big IPv4 broadcast domain despite going through IPv6 routers.
Actually this would also be quite useful in hosting environments where it would be easy to give every IPv6 customer their own VLAN but the IPv4 subnets are entangled.
More information about the NANOG