Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Dear Gert et al,

Should it be addressed in sunset4 WG?

Thank you,
Tina

-----Original Message-----
From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 4:36 PM
To: Mikael Abrahamsson
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org WG
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Please review the No IPv4 draft

Hi,

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:27:41AM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Apr 2014, Niall O'Reilly wrote:
> 
> >  Is the noise/signal (stet!) ratio in client-generated traffic 
> > already  so low that a few DHCPDISCOVERs per client would be noticeable?
> 
> If you have thousands of devices in the same domain, so yes.
> 
> Also, you have to remember that some devices will try to ARP for 
> "everything" when IPv4 is still turned on (using its IPv4 LL address).
> Having IPv4 be completely turned off on a LAN actually makes quite a 
> lot of sense.
> 
> So yes, there is a use-case.

I agree to this.  Interestingly, this is something else than "just shutdown the dhcpv4 client if this option is detected" - it is "shutdown IPv4", which many OSes can't do today at all (and yes, that needs fixing).

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops