[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP

To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino <itojun@itojun.org>
Subject: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:17:22 -0500
Cc: 69attendees@ietf.org, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <20070724151937.B5F6A233C5@coconut.itojun.org>
References: <20070724151937.B5F6A233C5@coconut.itojun.org>

[people were complaining about delays in getting an IPv4 address overDHCP, CCing the v6ops list to make a point]


On 24-jul-2007, at 10:19, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:

good reason to use IPv6 entirely, as long as you have IPv6 DNSserver:-P

More specifically, stateless autoconfig seems to work a lot betterthan DHCP in this case: one router advertisement can provide a largenumber of clients with address and configuration information, whileDHCP requires messages back and forth for each individual client. Agood reason to make sure that it's possible to run IPv6 with all thatthat entails (= DNS resolver addresses) without the need to runDHCPv6 if running DHCPv6 isn't specifically desired.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: james woodyatt <jhw@apple.com>
- Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
  - From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>

Prev by Date: Re: Distributing site-wide RFC 3484 policy
Next by Date: Re: Tagging traffic (Was: CPE equipments and stateful filters)
Previous by thread: Comments on addr-select-sol
Next by thread: Re: [69ATTENDEES] DHCP
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread