In article <2354c099-c801-43d2-8ee9-0da0aaad8...@bangj.com>, pusat...@bangj.com write:
>I read the draft and wasn't sure what problem they were trying to solve. The problem of having zillions of IPv6 addresses in use on a network with far fewer than a zillion actual end stations, which no network in existence is engineered to support. And also the requirement of network operators to be able to trace problem IP addresses back to end stations, which doesn't work if the end stations are constantly generating new IP addresses and abandoning the old ones. This has caused many network operators to disable SLAAC and use DHCPv6 instead, and I'm about to have to go down this path as well. >Why not just use temporary addresses (RFC 4941)? Because they're evil. >On the server side, this draft could be implemented in rtadvd. Not sure >who maintains that. There is no client/server here. The network infrastructure doesn't *care* how the client generates its IID. What it does care is that the client generate one, unique, long-term-stable, IID, rather than using nine different ones that change all the time. rtadvd has nothing to do with this. (Note: FreeBSD doesn't currently ship with RFC 4941 enabled. Most other operating systems do. RFC 7217 needs to be implemented, as a replacement for RFC 4941, before it is even considered to turn this switch on in FreeBSD.. RFC 7217 *actually solves the problem* that RFC 4941 was intended to solve, without requiring network operators to size their switch hardware for ten times the number of addresses as they have end stations.) -GAWollman _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
