Mac OS X 10.7, still no DHCPv6

Nick Hilliard nick at
Tue Mar 1 05:12:53 CST 2011

On 01/03/2011 04:24, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> Oddly enough the meeting NOC is in the business of providing services to
> customers and we generally assume that to be with the highest
> availability and minimum breakage feasible under the circumstances...	

That is exactly my point.

> I am mystified.

Don't be mystified. I'm just frustrated that ipv6 isn't further down the 
line in terms of basic plug-n-play functionality.  And it's easier to 
create straw men arguments and hurl blame at the IETF / vendors / everyone 
else than sit down and try to work through the problems.  I'm human.

So yes, I'm fully aware that the straw man of suggesting that ipv4 be 
disabled at an ietf meeting would cause breakage for reasons unrelated to 
the ra/dhcp mess, and more to do with lack of endpoint availability / 
operating system problems / etc (all unrelated to the ietf).  However, that 
doesn't mean that I feel less frustrated that mistakes of the past are 
coming back to haunt us.


More information about the NANOG mailing list