Re: [mif] Route option for DHCPv6 - next steps?

[Margaret Wasserman <[e-mail]>]

Speaking solely as a technical contributor...

I think this entire discussion of a "lifetime" of default routes being assigned via DHCP is going off the rails, and I'd like to explain why.

The DHCPv6 route option is _not_ a dynamic routing protocol.  The DHCP server doesn't fate share with the routing infrastructure and isn't expected to get route updates from routing protocols.  The purpose of the DHCPv6 route option is to allow centralized configuration of _static routes_ on a DHCPv6 configured node.  These can, and should be, the same sort of static routes as one can configure at a CLI ("sudo route add ..."), via  SNMP, or potentially at an administrative UI.  The purpose of putting this option in DHCP is to allow site admins to configure these routes, on a per-node basis if desired, from a central location, rather than needed to do it on each machine that joins that local network.   

So, why are we talking about route lifetimes, as though we think that some entity will come along and refresh this information on a regular basis?

Obviously, like all DHCP config, this information should be flushed when the node moves to a new network and begins a new DHCP exchange.  But, when the nodes stays on one network, it should remain constant, just like a DHCPv6-configured DNS Server list or NTP Server list.  

Shouldn't it?

Margaret