RE: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6

[Kelly Setzer <Kelly.Setzer () wnco com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bicknell () ufp org]
> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 7:55 PM
> To: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: The stupidity of trying to "fix" DHCPv6
[snip] 
> I understand on some level why the IETF doesn't want DHCPv4 to be able to hand
> out IPv6 stuff, and doesn't want DHCPv6 to hand out
> IPv4 stuff.  In the long run if you assume we transition to IPv6 and run only
> IPv6 for years after that it makes sense.
>
> However, I do think a single option is needed in both, "ProtocolsAvailable".
> Today it could have "4" or "6", or "4,6".
[snip]

DNS is "two-legged".  DNS and DHCP are so intertwined from an operational perspective, I don't see how we'll get 
through this without DHCP becoming two-legged.

> This would allow end stations to greatly optimize their behavior at all stages
> of deployment.

+1

Kelly

  ******* CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE *******

This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it may
contain legally privileged and confidential information intended
solely for the use of the addressee. If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
reading, dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of this
message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately and delete this message from your system. Thank you.