Re: [v6ops] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-hilliard-v6ops-host-addr-update-00.txt

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 17/07/2017 à 23:21, Ross Chandler a écrit :
> 
> 
>> On 17 Jul 2017, at 21:58, Alexandre Petrescu 
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> There is something wrong with that draft: it only allows for 64. 
>> Why? DHCPv6-PD can delegate other plengths, like 65.
> 
> I agree that is a deficiency.
> 
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pioxfolks-6man-pio-exclusive-bit-02.txt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  Introduces an eXclusive flag to optimize RA for nodes that are 
>>> exclusive receivers of all traffic to the prefix.
>> 
>> This is another way of calling RA “Prefix Delegation".
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
>> There are other drafts doing Prefix Delegation with RA, have you 
>> considered them?
> 
> No, what are they? The above one caught my eye because of the 
> employer of one of the authors.

draft-kaiser-nd-pd-00 "Prefix Delegation extension to Neighbor Discovery
                        protocol" and the year 2002 drafts it cites like
                        draft-lutchann-ipv6-delegate-option-00.txt and
                        draft-haberman-ipngwg-auto-prefix-02.txt

During these discussions of these draft it was often said that DHCPv6-PD 
is the way to go, so let's go that way.  (this suggestion is independent 
of the 3GPP link discussion).

Alex

> 
>>>> uthors of RFC3315, and I agree with this view.
>>> Given the above two drafts DHCPv6-PD to hosts has an uphill 
>>> struggle to ever achieve widespread deployment.
>> 
>> I don’t think so.
> 
> You’re more optimistic than me then.
> 
>> I think DHCPv6-PD should be trialled at IETF WiFi and then we’ll 
>> see.
> 
> 
> Yes, it should.
> 
> Ross
>