IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Mon, 23 May 2011 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C616E07EA for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2011 13:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PqOzzShfbgte for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 May 2011 13:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com (e33.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.151]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 151EAE07DB for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 13:10:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.228]) by e33.co.us.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id p4NK3ZvW006503 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 14:03:35 -0600
Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (d03av04.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.170]) by d03relay03.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id p4NKAjQj133962 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 14:10:45 -0600
Received: from d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id p4NEAdxX007088 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 May 2011 08:10:41 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (sig-9-65-221-88.mts.ibm.com [9.65.221.88]) by d03av04.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id p4NEAbKI006976 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 23 May 2011 08:10:38 -0600
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.12.5) with ESMTP id p4NKAV9X012654; Mon, 23 May 2011 16:10:32 -0400
Message-Id: <201105232010.p4NKAV9X012654@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com>
Subject: Re: Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD
In-reply-to: <C9F53B85.11BE93%john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com>
References: <C9F53B85.11BE93%john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com> message dated "Sun, 15 May 2011 12:15:37 -0000."
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 16:10:31 -0400
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
Cc: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 20:10:53 -0000

> Is the intention for the new text to relax the requirement for
> auto-configuration?

No. SLAAC remains a MUST. DHCPv6 though is now a SHOULD.

For one thing, DHCP doesn't have an option configure on-link prefixes,
so we still need SLAAC.

What we should have done oh-so-long-ago is ensure that you could
configure/operate a network with just DHCP (and no SLAAC at all) and
vice versa, and than made both a MUST on hosts.  That way, operators
truly have the choice as to which to use and everything would just
work.

Thomas

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email