Re: Multiple addresses [was Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD]

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Tue, 31 May 2011 12:44 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
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 B6BEDE078D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 May 2011 05:44:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 OJGDOYbBzaks for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 May 2011 05:44:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F05ACE076F for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 May 2011 05:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4VCi4mV006247 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 May 2011 13:44:04 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk p4VCi4mV006247
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=200903; t=1306845844; bh=G8hypoRkHP4DHqAIMjDwjUwjOno=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:References:To; b=ffDGIKL0P/Z7uNFQZXibtnJNFKeQh2egyDJzfoulF3Hz71pUYNOVQLZ+WWnEuaAQ7 S+K2llOT5VAfXxMNaWW4ZJAGjdjGA+TW2doaQLTjqIWQBNdckmsfrqbshGMG1hOOBb +5vbTvEudJG6c7mtmjlWBms7qWg6aGpyLNmwI1Wk=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP id n4UDi40035602278iZ ret-id none; Tue, 31 May 2011 13:44:04 +0100
Received: from dhcp-152-78-94-254.ecs.soton.ac.uk (dhcp-152-78-94-254.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.94.254]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p4VChwsH025209 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 May 2011 13:43:58 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Subject: Re: Multiple addresses [was Node Requirements: Elevating DHCPv6 from MAY to SHOULD]
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <4BC7CABA-D871-4B27-96BA-10A2F9D6D2B1@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 13:43:58 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <EMEW3|b25a01d9dd22c8ccbf7f6a9e9730be32n4UDi403tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|3C7CD9FA-6220-4CE6-921B-ABF2719E4189@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <4DE3F87A.5060502@globis.net> <4DE40821.9030205@gmail.com> <4DE420E2.6010207@globis.net> <4BC7CABA-D871-4B27-96BA-10A2F9D6D2B1@cisco.com> <3C7CD9FA-6220-4CE6-921B-ABF2719E4189@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=n4UDi4003560227800; tid=n4UDi40035602278iZ; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: p4VCi4mV006247
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
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: Tue, 31 May 2011 12:44:14 -0000

On 31 May 2011, at 03:38, Fred Baker wrote:
> 
> I would expect, however, that the use of DHCP is something configured on the system in question, just like it is in IPv4. Not that there is an auto-configure option in IPv4 - the other alternative is manual configuration, and most systems come with DHCP configured as the default. IPv6 systems come, at least today, with SLAAC as the default. So there is a requirement to configure DHCPv6, at least from that perspective. That said, SLAAC ain't gonna happen in the absence of RAs, and you can disable RAs on the router. So if an interface comes up and no RA is forthcoming, I could imagine the thing probing with a DHCPv6 request.

But then it can't get a default router configuration by DHCPv6?

It's interesting that my 18(?) month old HP Laserjet n model has IPv6 support, and even being that old can be configured to 

a) just autoconfigure
b) use DHCPv6 when the M bit is set in the RA
c) use DHCPv6 when stateless autoconfig fails
d) always use DHCPv6
or
e) use a manually-configured IPv6 address. 

If you're interested in how that appears via the HP web config screen, see a screenshot at http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/tjc/ietf/hplaserjet-example.png

I think, but am not sure, that the screenshot shows the default configuration.  While there is no privacy addressing in this example, that could be an additional option, though it makes little sense for such a device.

To me, if you want to run DHCPv6, you set the RA M bit, and it's then down to hosts to choose to honour that.  But if you don't have management control of any device, unless you put additional measures in place, the host can always be configured with a different/additional address to that offered by DHCPv6. 

Tim