Re: SLAAC vs DHCPv6 (II)

[Fernando Gont <[e-mail]>]

On 28/1/20 06:02, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> But it does violate the recommendation if you use it to enforce how many 
> addresses the host can use. The text is:
> 
>     Due to the drawbacks imposed by requiring explicit requests for
>     address space (seeSection 4  <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7934#section-4>), it is RECOMMENDED that the network
>     give the host the ability to use new addresses without requiring
>     explicit requests.  This can be achieved either by allowing the host
>     to form new addresses autonomously (e.g., via SLAAC) or by providing
>     the host with a dedicated /64 prefix.  The prefix MAY be provided
>     using DHCPv6 PD, SLAAC with per-device VLANs, or any other means.
> 
> 
> If the network is able to deny a registration, then it's not a 
> registration, it's a request.

The network always wins. Folks could run SAVI, and enforce one addrees 
per node, even with SLAAC. Yes, you're address wouldn't be rejected .. 
it just wouldn't work. The outcome is the same.


-- 
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
e-mail: [e-mail]
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492