Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

[Simon Perreault <[e-mail]>]

Le 2014-04-15 07:35, Nick Hilliard a écrit :
> This is not an especially relevant argument because if there were a dhcpv4
> option to handle this, all you would need to provide the service would be a
> local stub dhcpv4 mechanism to reply with a DHCPOFFER with a No Service
> option. There would be no requirement to back-haul the initial DHCPREQUEST
> to a centralised provisioning system.  IOW, from an operational point of
> view, this can be provided simply and easily using dhcpv4 at the local
> level, and this mechanism would spectacularly avoid the deployment problems
> that Ray outlined.  Handling this over DHCPv6 involves a level of string,
> gum and duck tape that makes me want to cringe.

This doesn't work when the L2 link is shared with clients to which you
do want to provide IPv4 service.

> As a separate issue, if the operator really wants to disable all ipv4, why
> not disable ethertypes 0x0800 and 0x0806 at the mac forwarding layer?

This doesn't work when the L2 link is shared with clients to which you
do want to provide IPv4 service.

Simon
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca