On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 03:42:29PM -0400, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
> If you want to test a resource, be it the end user or an infrastructure
> interface, how do you know how to foo it (foo being some value of ping,
> traceroute, look it up in SNMP/NetFlow, etc)?
>
> I submit that if you use dyna
rkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 3:42 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
This was especially a question when L2 was "in" and routing was out: how do
you ping a MAC address?
, 2008 3:42 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
To try to stay operational about this, I have a reality testing question
I've used in IPv4 and, for that matter, bridged networks:
If you want to test a resource, be it the end user or an infrastructure
interface, h
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 11:11:16PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> Forget about it on XP, but it's in Vista. You can add it to BSD/Linux
> without too much trouble (are there good, bugfree implementations for those
> yet?)
If anyone is aware of any bugs in ISC dhclient -6, please submit the
Charles Wyble wrote:
This was especially a question when L2 was "in" and routing was out:
how do
you ping a MAC address?
l2ping works on bluetooth devices on Linux. Might work for other stuff
as well. Not sure what Cisco offers in this regard.
The ideal solution would be OAM. Of course
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Charles Wyble wrote:
http://internecine.eu/systems/windows_xp-ipv6.html and
http://internecine.eu/software/dibbler_dhcpv6.html discuss how to deploy
dhcpv6 on xp. It's 3rd party but doable.
Hmmm I'm getting "You don't have permission to access
/systems/windows_xp-ipv6.ht
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
Sean Siler wrote:
> Nope. XP does not support DHCPv6 - only Vista/Windows Server 2008 (and later)
> can do that.
>
> Sean
http://internecine.eu/systems/windows_xp-ipv6.html and
http://internecine.eu/software/dibbler_dhcpv6.html di
On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Charles Wyble wrote:
Forget about it on XP,
Hmmm. MS says otherwise:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/ipv6/ipv6faq.mspx
None of the XP systems here (even with all the latest service packs
installed) seem to do DHCPv6.
but it's in Vista. You can add it to BSD/
Sean Siler wrote:
Nope. XP does not support DHCPv6 - only Vista/Windows Server 2008 (and later)
can do that.
Sean
http://internecine.eu/systems/windows_xp-ipv6.html and
http://internecine.eu/software/dibbler_dhcpv6.html discuss how to deploy
dhcpv6 on xp. It's 3rd party but doable.
> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:27:56 -0700
> From: Charles Wyble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> > On 18 aug 2008, at 22:23, Dale W. Carder wrote:
> >
> >> DHCPv6
> >> - doesn't ship w/ some OS's
> >
> > Forget about it on XP,
>
> Hmmm. MS says otherwise:
> http://www.microso
Nope. XP does not support DHCPv6 - only Vista/Windows Server 2008 (and later)
can do that.
Sean
-Original Message-
From: TJ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 2:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>-Original Message-
&g
>-Original Message-
>From: Charles Wyble [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 5:28 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>
>Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>> On 18 aug 2008, at 22:23, Dale W. Carder wrote:
>>
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 18 aug 2008, at 22:23, Dale W. Carder wrote:
DHCPv6
- doesn't ship w/ some OS's
Forget about it on XP,
Hmmm. MS says otherwise:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/network/ipv6/ipv6faq.mspx
but it's in Vista. You can add it to BSD/Linux without too much
troubl
On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 12:52:50PM -0700, Scott Weeks wrote:
> Seeing Howard's quick response saying "To try to stay operational
> about this..." makes me realize I may have inadvertently invited a
> religious flame fest.
I guess that rules me out. :(
> Please! Operational content and hands-on e
On 18 aug 2008, at 22:23, Dale W. Carder wrote:
- really, really, really broken: it didn't support handing out
any DNS info until RFC 5006, thus SLAAC still requires human
intervention on a client to make "teh v6 interwebs" work.
While I agree that it is bad that the DNS configuration issue
>-Original Message-
>From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 4:24 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Cc: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: Re: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>
>
>Hey Scott,
>
>On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Scott W
>-Original Message-
>From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 3:42 PM
>To: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: RE: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>
>To try to stay operational about this, I have a reality testing question
>I've used
>-Original Message-
>From: Scott Weeks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 3:34 PM
>To: nanog@nanog.org
>Subject: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
>
>
>
>-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>From: "TJ" <[EMAIL PROTECT
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
To try to stay operational about this,
H. I think this is an operational topic, but I can see how it would
be seen as more of a strategic item.
I have a reality testing question
I've used in IPv4 and, for that matter, bridged networks:
I submit that if you use
Hey Scott,
On Aug 18, 2008, at 2:33 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
From: "TJ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As a general rule, most clients are following the "If we gave them
static
IPv4 addresses we will give them static IPv6
addresses" (infrastructure,
servers, etc). The
The whole SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6 is a separate (albeit
related) conversation ...
I'm still an IPv6 wussie and would like to learn more before moving forward,
so would anyone care to share info on experiences with this decision?
-- [
This was especially a question when L2 was "in" and routing was out: how do
you ping a MAC address?
Howard
-Original Message-
From: Scott Weeks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 3:34 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
---
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: "TJ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
As a general rule, most clients are following the "If we gave them static
IPv4 addresses we will give them static IPv6 addresses" (infrastructure,
servers, etc). The whole SLAAC(autoconfi
23 matches
Mail list logo
