Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Make Hosts Confusing-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem

Lorenzo Colitti <> Sun, 27 October 2013 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B61611E8283 for <>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.893
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.084, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IpVderKZA3qH for <>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::234]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE67E11E8192 for <>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id e14so9376574iej.39 for <>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=MNHTAuXJp4dS9guAxYrCT4HkyB7bNLtL6kzK+5R8NJI=; b=k4hiLExto2wLNrHXv1dxfaUjdYWRtFsgYa6b34mgHT9WyWKko0PJzdqqHS9Z6nellM nQfprjwukroyg5DxAEpV8AGKIySmE6IvJuX27QBbS/eM0rhJoNfhoiH4+nSA0CnDrrZN IYgU85YGH2S3AeTL7ZJRpYl3aAnTLsqn03B/lSF1sw2yzCWWxY29FPBULsAm4hmvQpKN RYfmqzUJAYYOafPjABW1ruwSSb2EfzmCoqr/WGFI9fMsieUj4bsQ7J0Uw4ZbY+jugcp2 ULEoYRR0DDE1Xjquq3tio4uXy8TG9TRMEqpOpnb4Mi+rRC1p/b+IfoEeC9SBKlFkPv+I SYMQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=MNHTAuXJp4dS9guAxYrCT4HkyB7bNLtL6kzK+5R8NJI=; b=VLQAHJGBVEpGMNkNhF6ASYbo8msW2qMCwBV/AFEJmm+agVI0OKtnMTCkzUcZ1KadBx vynNuMHiqBCtc7YO7eEpcAHyy0NHjW9QESxxSG1cCiYOZW9quAhxNhFdxoy9JG6iOkmG BZN8MvPq6Q0ARb/xQ910SE4YsSBIScep/0hdgJ87KASPonqD/4HCwyxceGDJjpih67j+ kSZeTLeEPKeqq80/oPGKrQ3KLITunO7aqSq3COdk6j5HvUP+UwwhnhQcNNWRhs7IMznT aBAo2sO6KHpfpTjBRhGVoNwsOqfoCDoYuwtUk+/lZPB38K3fMBR2lu7LuZSWY6b0i8cU 3Okw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmA8du44b1H2mYPAuFrzTuGW3YQuM5cOR29DpYDQFezFbKuKKhTTNexgtVCjhPJM4CepfCPEHULtBVtBFORqeqcLNhqny2FhYf1uO1T9+REftpe1ELEHYAFsODy/oJ8VW4Lwyh4HufExbhcRb5NtW3nJ95TDFXHGEXVX1AZ2OWoqJk00j0qZs/RcYSwx7AO6HEc69pw
X-Received: by with SMTP id w3mr5421662igl.17.1382885933289; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 07:58:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20131027145224.GT50205@Space.Net>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <20131027145224.GT50205@Space.Net>
From: Lorenzo Colitti <>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:58:33 +0900
Message-ID: <>
To: Gert Doering <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bfea186d1cdb104e9ba389f
Cc: "" <>, Ted Lemon <>, "Ole Troan \(otroan\)" <>, Dave Thaler <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] DHCPv6/SLAAC Make Hosts Confusing-//RE: new draft: draft-liu-bonica-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 14:58:54 -0000

On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Gert Doering <> wrote:

> > > I do not think that I made an actual proposal here.
> > I mean "Stateful RA could actually be piggybacked onto DHCP, so that the
> > router just creates a DHCP message and forwards it upstream, or answers
> > it locally, depending on the circumstances." xing
> This is called "DHCP relay or DHCP server on the router".  I can't see
> what this has to do with RA ("periodically multicasted to everyone who
> wants to receive it").
> This idea is... completely lacking the understanding of the difference
> between solicited and unsolicited information, and also of the existing
> possibilities of just having a DHCPv6 server (or relay) on the router
> itself.

The way I read that was:

1. Host sends RS.
2. Router gets RS, encapsulates it in DHCPv6 option to DHCPv6 server.
3. Server replies with RA parameters.
4. Router sends unicast RA to host.

The unicast RA would have more information than the multicast RA (e.g.,
more specific routes). The idea being that you if you do this you can send
different clients different information (which is one of the things that
DHCPv6 offers but RAs typically do not).

So it's basically a RA-to-DHCPv6 translator in the router.

If you want to do it this way, I don't see why you would use DHCPv6 and not
something like radius, but I suppose you might want to do that if you need
to keep state on the server (radius is stateless).