IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] What about using a single dhcpv6 server for dual-stack hosts to get ipv6/ipv4 settings?

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 10 March 2011 02:29 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72E2C3A67F7 for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:29:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.955
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.955 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.557, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_32=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_63=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JKwtbbC2mDUh for <dhcwg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:29:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og107.obsmtp.com (exprod7og107.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.167]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D8D53A67F6 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:29:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from source ([64.89.228.229]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob107.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKTXg34OOgmdLSP7r0OiP7yDwg5aoB1SSM@postini.com; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 18:30:57 PST
Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 987D91B861C for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:30:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (webmail.nominum.com [64.89.228.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "webmail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8910B190078; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:30:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Ted.Lemon@nominum.com)
Received: from vpna-148.vpn.nominum.com (64.89.227.148) by exchange-01.win.nominum.com (64.89.228.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:30:56 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1203)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_05F0D338-E265-412B-89E6-438F98ADCE0A"
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <OFF516690B.154C51B6-ON4825784C.001D5A5D-4825784C.0022DA22@zte.com.cn>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 21:30:51 -0500
Message-ID: <CF3E2344-BE45-424B-AFE7-2D97E749AAC5@nominum.com>
References: <OFF516690B.154C51B6-ON4825784C.001D5A5D-4825784C.0022DA22@zte.com.cn>
To: hu.yuxing@zte.com.cn
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1203)
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org, "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, Bud Millwood <budm@weird-solutions.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] What about using a single dhcpv6 server for dual-stack hosts to get ipv6/ipv4 settings?
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 02:29:41 -0000

On Mar 7, 2011, at 1:19 AM, <hu.yuxing@zte.com.cn>
 <hu.yuxing@zte.com.cn> wrote:
> Yes,as you said, NAT64 is a good choice,but maybe not better.NAT64 has its limitations and problems. 

I think that before you have this discussion here, you probably ought to talk to the softwires and/or behave working groups, or perhaps the routing area directors, about your proposal, and get them to agree that it's a worthwhile solution.   A lot of people are talking about solutions in this space, and I think you need to get the routing end of this nailed down before you start talking about major changes to DHCPv6 to support it.

v2.30.2 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status