Subject: RE: PPP and Global Addresses

From: "Peter Barany"<[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:00:19 -0600

Not even when the M and O bits in the Router Advertisement message are
configured to indicate a combination of stateless and stateful
autoconfiguration such that DHCPv6 provides options (e.g., SIP server
option) but not an actual address?

-----Original Message-----
From: Francis Dupont [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, February 15, 2002 9:55 AM
To: NOISETTE Yoann FTRD/DMI/CAE
Cc: 'Yamasaki Toshi'; Lilian Fernandes; [email-masked];
[email-masked]
Subject: Re: PPP and Global Addresses 

 In your previous mail you wrote:

      "... The creation and management of that pool is
      beyond the scope of this document, but it can be supposed that
      minimalistically a Delegating Router will be statically configured
      with a fixed pool."
   
   What I meant is that the pool used by the Delegating router, in which it
   takes the prefix it delegates to Requesting routers, could be set using
the
   DHCPv6 option for prefix delegation. Actually, only static (I understand
   "manual") configuration is considered.

=> this notion of static (DHCP terminology) / manual (common terminology)
allocation is more important than one can believe. The difference between
BOOTP and DHCP is the introduction of the dynamic (DHCP terminology)
allocation. My main concern about DHCPv6 is the dynamic allocation
makes sense only for a scarce resource: this is the case for IPv4
addresses but definitively *not* for IPv6 addresses... So DHCPv6 is
basically useless (and in the real world not used at all :-).

Regards

[email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 17:50:25 +0100

=> look at SLPv2 (RFC 2608) and DNS SRV RRs (RFC 2782) for service
location tools which are *really* used. I am tired to find alternative
uses of DHCPv6 when its main use (and 90% of the protocol) makes no sense.

Regards