Re: [RRG] Consensus check: renumbering - missing dimension

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

On 2008-08-26 09:28, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> wrote:
>>
>> |The reasoning is that IPv6 was designed that way, so why not
>> |use the feature if it proves to be useful, at least for small/medium
>> |sites.
>>
>>
>> Do folks really feel that stateless autoconfig is a significant step forward
>> vs. DHCP?  Current dual-stack site admins would be especially welcome to
>> opine.
>>
> 
> stateless-autoconfig is entirely not sufficient for site admins to use
> in a 'renumbering' event. There are many items passed out in DHCP
> responses which are used by the end systems and not included in
> stateless-autoconfig. Existing practices account for these items via
> DHCP in a mostly centralized manner, without these items site-admins
> will be left with no option but to manually touch each device...
> 
> Take a moderately large enterprise of 50k systems in a global setting,
> how long will it take to touch each of the 50k devices and change even
> the basics: dns-server, wins-servers, domainname  (assume you can not
> 'trust' the system owner/user to get this right, and assume you have
> limited helpdesk-staff).

My memory is that back when stateless auto-config was conceived,
the main target was the "dentist's office" scenario, i.e.
basic Appletalk-like zeroconf sites. Unfortunately we still
have one hole in this area: no way to advertise a DNS server
address in RA messages. See RFC 4339.

I'm quite sure that larger sites with any kind of IT management
will need DHCPv6.

But I don't see why that interacts with the multi-prefix issue.

    Brian

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg