V6 still not supported
owen at delong.com
Thu Mar 24 22:17:20 UTC 2022
> On Mar 24, 2022, at 14:49 , Michael Thomas <mike at mtcc.com> wrote:
> On 3/24/22 2:13 PM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
>>> On Mar 24, 2022, at 02:04 , Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <nanog at nanog.org> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>> From 10k meters: IPv6 is different from IPv4 only by:
>>> - extension headers
>>> - SLAAC instead of DHCP
>>> Everything else is minor.
>> There’s no such thing as SLAAC instead of DHCP… There’s SLACC in addition to DHCP and operators
>> are free to choose the solution that best fits their network.
>> I suppose the argument could be made that Android is SLAAC instead of DHCP, but I don’t buy that as a
>> complete showstopper these days. I do wish Lorenzo and Google would pull their collective crania out of
>> their hind quarters on this issue, but my vote is to treat Android as damage and route around it.
> If you have SLAAC and DHCP4 isn't that good enough? Is there a DHCP4 option for v6 DNS addresses too?
Why would you need that? It doesn’t make sense to provide v6 DNS server information over a v4 protocol.
SLAAC (RFC6106) can already provide RDNSS information (Resolving DNS Server) in the RAs.
SLAAC and/or DHCPv6 are completely separate from DHCPv4. There’s no overlap and there shouldn’t be any.
> Mike, not that I disagree about the silliness of not implementing DHCP6
People who support Lorenzo’s religion are relatively few and far between in the operational community.
More information about the NANOG