IETF Logo Mail Archive

[v6ops] dhcpv6-slaac-problem [was Interest in DHCPv6 Route/DefRouter/Src-basedRoute configuration to Client?]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 30 March 2013 08:54 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFD021F8B0A for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.306
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.306 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.385, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2xuo+LQyeYe for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x235.google.com (mail-we0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B24C21F8B11 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id d7so773818wer.40 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent :mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=y3+1Q38GuL9KebHlYbSILJ2UfLPGlaqtQuCCSN6SDBY=; b=dDRU4E2S6P7mWaTFg/2V8E7R9LcTQRT2ckwYrqrurHZox1i9yrI+PHXZDeotn3F7VV 9dcpqdiVA+XbFRc5RozuaTmFYK2ojxaOiS4RhlsHxMjz553Y55o7eB0cEPg6s2sMjsXS VywY4aZPyxuvHJHJa6lcOapTZW1oH8mONuWPPN/anpQUTSuDxesymkD8zyyyv9OwHoWy H4zfnc2mCqplckTMyGFrXH5FcxZ4S3WIc/+CbFY0jEFhuRZk+MjLjSVyUOeBeOHwNDEC p96TbWN3nYPVQNgLDJ8nalJGCBIEW0FHUuVl+lc6+7hU6nBCiOgieRqjtsK8Rpnh7WjU 2CFg==
X-Received: by 10.194.93.97 with SMTP id ct1mr7112274wjb.48.1364633643368; Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:54:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (host-2-102-216-115.as13285.net. [2.102.216.115]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id s2sm2544003wib.4.2013.03.30.01.54.01 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 30 Mar 2013 01:54:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5156A83A.2090604@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:54:18 +0000
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
References: <245C63EB-935D-40F6-9949-028BE99CDE1D@muada.com> <51568CB9.7010609@dougbarton.us> <6EE826D8-F3EA-415B-837A-8DB793BA5617@muada.com> <20130330.083107.74693658.sthaug@nethelp.no> <A96B26C0-0354-44A3-9BD6-DEC4B5A882AC@muada.com>
In-Reply-To: <A96B26C0-0354-44A3-9BD6-DEC4B5A882AC@muada.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: [v6ops] dhcpv6-slaac-problem [was Interest in DHCPv6 Route/DefRouter/Src-basedRoute configuration to Client?]
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:54:04 -0000

On 30/03/2013 07:42, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 30 mrt 2013, at 8:31, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote:
> 
>>>> you want to run your DHCPv6 client always, even if there is no M=1. This means that networks will see tons of multicasts looking for a DHCPv6 server, retransmitted at infinitum if there is no DHCPv6 server, wasting precious airtime on wireless networks where multicasts are sent at a very low rate
> 
>> How is this worse than current DHCPv4 client behavior?
> 
> In the IPv4 world, DHCP is the only game in town. So it's reasonable to assume the presence of a DHCP server. In the IPv4 world, there can be stateless autoconfig or DHCPv6 for address assignment. If hosts are going to solicit an address through DHCPv6 that means everyone has to run a DHCPv6 server to soak up those requests, even the people who just want to use stateless autoconfiguration.

I think people should look at draft-liu-bonica-dhcpv6-slaac-problem,
because it really is time to resolve this issue. And it's
orthogonal to the default/source route issue.

   Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email