Warren Kumari wrote:
Unfortunately the was a bad case of creeping featuritis and we got:
A new, and unfortunately very complex way of resolving L2 addresses.
You may use ARP (and DHCP) with IPv6.
Extension headers that make it so you cannot actually forward
> packets in modern hardware
> ( http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wkumari-long-headers-00)
True.
SLAAC, which then required privacy addressing and then fun that
> that entails / the DHCP debacle.
The problem of SLAAC is that it is stateful in fully distributed
manner. That is all the nodes have their own states on address
assignment
Most operators address ptp Ethernet links with a /30 or /31 in V4. Took a long time to
get this in V6 (RFC 6164 - "Using 127-Bit IPv6 Prefixes on Inter-Router Link")
and it is still controversial.
We ended up in a space where perceived elegance and shiny
> features overshadowed what folk actually wanted
> -- 96 more bits, no magic.
Maybe. But the folk actually needed 8 (or 16 at most) more bits.
>> 15 years later,
>> dhcp is still a cf, i have to run a second server (why the hell does
>> isc not merge them?), i can not use it for finding my gateway or vrrp
>> exit, ... at least we got rid of the tla/nla classful insanity. but
>> u/g? puhleeze.
>
> Yup
TLA/NLA is a good thing, *IF* multiple addresses of a node
and automatic renumbering including routers and DNS were
properly supported. It is not very difficult to have done so.
Masataka Ohta