Re: [dhcwg] Anyone interested in continuing draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-pool-opt?

[[e-mail]]

> BTW - I think I may have indicated this before, but does this really avoid the need for configuration on the router (relay)? How are items such as the link-address and next hop (dhcp server) addresses configured (rfc 3315 has a multicast default)? So there is still a bunch of "manual" configuration required? Admittedly you do say "more automation" but not really sure that has a lot of value - perhaps we need a Dynamic Router Configuration BOF?

As an operator I would prefer DHCPv6 to work similarly to DHCPv4 in a
typical scenario of:

- Large pools are explicitly configured on routers (relay agents).
- DHCP server is allowed to hand out addresses *within these pools*.
- Routers (relay agents) use information in the relayed DHCP packets
to build up some state (for instance making it possible to invalidate
the IP address when the lease expires).

Thus the DHCP server has a *limited* amount of freedom to hand out IP
within pools already known by the routers.

I would be very uncomfortable with, and probably would not want to
use, DHCP options which would let the DHCP server control address
allocation without any kind of preconfiguration on the router.

Steinar Haug, AS 2116