[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
- Subject: SLAAC(autoconfig) vs DHCPv6
- From: charles at thewybles.com (Charles Wyble)
- Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:52:06 -0700
- In-reply-to: <007b01c9016a$8cd72180$020fa8c0@HDESK1>
- References: <[email protected]> <007b01c9016a$8cd72180$020fa8c0@HDESK1>
Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
> To try to stay operational about this,
Hmmmm. 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 dynamic assignment of any sort, you really have to
> have DNS dynamic update, so you can use a known name to query the function
> that's indexed by address. Otherwise, static addresses become rather
> necessary if you want to check a resource.
>
Naturally. DNS name would be required, or a static address. In an
ISP/service provider environment I imagine that being able to hand out
dynamic ranges would be useful. Having to handle that statically would
be painful. :)
> 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.
--
Charles Wyble (818) 280 - 7059
http://charlesnw.blogspot.com
CTO Known Element Enterprises / SoCal WiFI project