Subject: RE: draft-ietf-ipv6-node-requirements-03.txt

From: "Bound, Jim" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 08:39:32 -0500

> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003, Bound, Jim wrote:
> > In addition the Enterprise wireline networks and IT are not
> going to
> > give up stateful control with servers and NAS in their
> networks for a
> > long time with IPv6 is my intelligence from my work with users.
> 
> Are servers and NAS configured with DHCPv4 today?

Sometimes.  Point above was NAS and SErvers use DHCPv4 to give out the
addreses and maintain that database.

> 
> Not that I know of, we certainly don't do it (even though we
> use DHCPv4 for most workstations).  Of course, that's 
> possible, e.g. by identifying MAC-address in the servers 
> etc., but I'm not sure if all that many folks do it.
> 
> Don't underestimate the power of an admin doing manual
> configuration. :-)
> 
> So, my point is that there's a lot more to it than just
> "stateful" or "stateless".
> 
> The critical point, IMO, is making the nodes able to easily
> configure other parameters they'd like, using DHCP-lite, or 
> other mechanisms like that.  Few people prefer to punch all 
> of that in manually.

The 'O' Bit is supportive of SHOULD too.

/jim
> 
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
> 
> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------