Hi Matthew, > The mix of having to do this crazy thing of gateway announcements > from one place, DNS from somewhere else, possibly auto-assigning > addresses from a router, but maybe getting them over DHCPv6. It's > just confusing and unnecessary and IMHO isn't helpful for > persuading people to move to IPv6. Especially when everyone > already understands DHCP in the v4 world. > > Both RAs and DHCP have their place and can be really useful > together or apart in different situations, but witholding key > functionality from DHCP "beacuse you can do it in a RA instead" > isn't helping the v6 cause.
Have you ever tried to deploy IPv6 (even if only in a lab environment)? I have worked with several companies (ISP and enterprise) and once they stop thinking "I want to do everything in IPv6 in exactly the same way as I have always done in IPv4" and actually look at the features that IPv6 provides them they are usually much happier with IPv6 than they were with IPv4. I am sure that a century ago people who were used to horse and buggy transport thought that cars were annoyingly complex and that having to put petrol in instead of hay was a huge problem. But I am very glad that in the end they adapted instead of convincing other people to make cars run on hay ;) Just joking of course, but seriously: we need to look at what the best solution for the future is, not at ways of avoiding having to learn something new/different. Cheers, Sander
