| reply to brad
Re: World IPv6 Day said by brad:Exactly. An end host vs a router. Your host is using an address configured via RA. The routers need DHCPv6-PD. Route Advertisement / SLAAC works just as well for routers and hosts since if you advertise a /64 to a host, it will simply fill the remaining 64 bits using SLAAC if enabled, which it is by default. A router would simply use the subnet address to generate its WAN address (usually whatever::1) and either re-advertise the subnet on the LAN or start allocating addresses from that IPv6 subnet using local DHCP.
Routers do not need to receive their IPv6 allocation through DHCPv6. All the IPv6 papers I remember reading say RA/SLAAC prefix delegation is the preferred method in the absence of specific reasons to use DHCP such as wanting to manage static IPv6 addresses using DHCP. |
|
|
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | said by InvalidError:Route Advertisement / SLAAC works just as well for routers and hosts since if you advertise a /64 to a host, it will simply fill the remaining 64 bits using SLAAC if enabled, which it is by default. A router would simply use the subnet address to generate its WAN address (usually whatever::1) and either re-advertise the subnet on the LAN or start allocating addresses from that IPv6 subnet using local DHCP.
Routers do not need to receive their IPv6 allocation through DHCPv6. All the IPv6 papers I remember reading say RA/SLAAC prefix delegation is the preferred method in the absence of specific reasons to use DHCP such as wanting to manage static IPv6 addresses using DHCP.
I'll have to track this down to see if this has changed but the spec does not allow for RA on a router. You're not supposed to use RA on a host with more than one interface. Ya I know that's kind of strange nowadays and even end hosts can have more than one interface nowadays but that's how it was defined.
Also I didn't mean the /64 for the PPP interface. I was referring to the /56 or whatever prefix for behind the router. AFAIK RA does not propagate such prefixes anyway and that's why I'm mentioning DHCPv6-PD. |
|
