V6 still not supported

Owen DeLong 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.

Owen



More information about the NANOG mailing list