turning on comcast v6
morrowc.lists at gmail.com
Fri Dec 20 17:52:36 UTC 2013
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 11:56 AM, <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Dec 2013 12:36:38 +0000, Jamie Bowden said:
>> How many times do the IPv6 people have to hear that until DHCPv6 reaches
>> feature parity with DCHPv4, IPv6 is dead to enterprise networks?
> How many times do the IPv4 people have to hear that many sites are running
> IPv6 on enterprise networks, and maybe that whole DHCPv6 thing is not as
> big a deal as you think?
'cant we all just get along' ? :)
it seems to me that at least:
SLAAC works (for some people, without modifications/other-foo)
DHCPV6 works (for some folks)
both work together
there are usecases where:
"MachineX must always be 126.96.36.199/32 && a:b:c::4/128"
there are usescases where:
"pool of machines behind this LAN interface can be anything in this netblock"
there are good reasons to have dhcp attirbutes about:
and with the ability of the 'systems people' to control those
destination(s) for population sets in the network.
I'm sure it doesn't serve us all (as folk that want the network to
continue to grow and succeed) to pidgeon hole people/systems/networks
with: "Must use X" or "Must use Y" when both X and Y work perfectly
well (or could be made to work perfectly well with some more
specification and requirements gathering).
happy holidays, ba-humbug...
More information about the NANOG