quietly....

[frnkblk at iname.com (Frank Bulk)]

Requiring them to be on certain well known addresses is restrictive and
creates an unnecessary digression from IPv4 practice.  It's comments like
this that raise the hair on admins' necks.  At least mine.

Frank

-----Original Message-----
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum [mailto:iljitsch at muada.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 9:23 AM
To: Owen DeLong
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: quietly....

On 2 feb 2011, at 16:00, Owen DeLong wrote:

> SLAAC fails because you can't get information about DNS, NTP, or anything
other than a list of prefixes and a router that MIGHT actually be able to
default-route your packets.

Who ever puts NTP addresses in DHCP? That doesn't make any sense. I'd rather
use a known NTP server that keeps correct time.

For DNS in RA, see RFC 6106.

But all of this could easily have been avoided: why are we _discovering_ DNS
addresses in the first place? Simply host them on well known addresses and
you can hardcode those addresses, similar to the 6to4 gateway address. But
no, no rough consensus on something so simple.

> DHCP fails because you can't get a default router out of it.

If you consider that wrong, I don't want to be right.