> On Mar 24, 2022, at 14:49 , Michael Thomas <m...@mtcc.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 3/24/22 2:13 PM, Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 24, 2022, at 02:04 , Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>> From 10k meters: IPv6 is different from IPv4 only by:
>>> - extension headers
>>> - SLAAC instead of DHCP
>>> Everything else is minor.
>> There’s no such thing as SLAAC instead of DHCP… There’s SLACC in addition to
>> DHCP and operators
>> are free to choose the solution that best fits their network.
>>
>> I suppose the argument could be made that Android is SLAAC instead of DHCP,
>> but I don’t buy that as a
>> complete showstopper these days. I do wish Lorenzo and Google would pull
>> their collective crania out of
>> their hind quarters on this issue, but my vote is to treat Android as damage
>> and route around it.
>
> If you have SLAAC and DHCP4 isn't that good enough? Is there a DHCP4 option
> for v6 DNS addresses too?
Why would you need that? It doesn’t make sense to provide v6 DNS server
information over a v4 protocol.
SLAAC (RFC6106) can already provide RDNSS information (Resolving DNS Server) in
the RAs.
SLAAC and/or DHCPv6 are completely separate from DHCPv4. There’s no overlap and
there shouldn’t be any.
> Mike, not that I disagree about the silliness of not implementing DHCP6
People who support Lorenzo’s religion are relatively few and far between in the
operational community.
Owen
