This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ipv6-wg] [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Michael Richardson
mcr+ietf at sandelman.ca
Wed Jan 18 00:38:22 CET 2023
Ole Trøan <otroan at employees.org> wrote: >> The lack of a standardized way to communicate DHCPv6-server PD to >> DHCPv6-relay, and the expectation that the relay would just *snoop* on the >> DHCPv6-PD contents has bugged me for a long time. If we are going to >> recommend that they act as relays, then I'd like to fix that. > If DHCP is used for prefix assignment inside of a site, the relay does > not need to do route injection for the requesting router. The RR can > simply advertise the assigned prefix in routing. a) it's actually cross-site. > Ah, you don’t want to run a routing protocol? Well, there’s your problem. b) If you can find a way to deploy OSPFv3 (or BABEL) in every home network, then I'm game. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF at sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 515 bytes Desc: not available URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20230117/0a473374/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [Snac] [v6ops] "router cascade with DHCPv6-PD"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]