Subject: RE: DHCPv6lite, RA and WKA

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:16:09 -0000

> A slightly different approach is to start with well known 
> addresses.  If an RA option is heard (probably in the same RA 
> with the prefix) with new DNS addresses give these priority 
> over the well known addresses.  If the RA messages tell the 
> host to use DHCP for "additional stateful config", then 
> request this information via DHCP.  If new DNS addresses are 
> received via DHCP, then give these priority over any other 
> DNS addresses known by the hosts.

This seems attractive, but what happens when a host that doesn't support
WKA or RA turns up on a network that is using RA (and not WKA or
DHCPv6(lite)) for DNS configuration? Of course there are other
permutations that b0rk as well. What you seem to be saying is, let's
implement all three methods on hosts, and then it won't matter what the
network actually supports?

Mat

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <[email-masked]>.

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:07:32 -0800

Matt,

>network actually supports?

I was describing an approach to support multiple mechanism and handle them 
in a known and predictable way.  If they were all implemented then it would 
not matter what the network supported.

All IPv6 nodes will support RA's for address autoconfiguration, so it is 
reasonable to assume that they would also support an RA DNS option (if it 
existed).  If well known addresses were defined, then I suspect most hosts 
would support these by default as well.

Bob