RA for a different router

[Alexander Clouter]

Nick Hilliard <nick-lists at netability.ie> wrote:
>
> On 19/12/2009 16:43, Bit Gossip wrote:
>
>> do you know if it is possible to use RA for the router to advertise not
>> itself but some other address as the default router for the prefix?
> 
> Basically, no.  This isn't part of the spec, because RA announcements come
> from routers which can route traffic for a particular ipv6 prefix.
> Otherwise, they wouldn't be announcing that they could route traffic for
> that prefix, right?
> 
>> I had a look also at DHCPv6 for the same purpose but no option, at list
>> with IOS for doing that.... Is it possible with DHCPv6?
> 
> One day, it will be possible to set a default gateway using dhcpv6, just
> not yet.  The specification is in I-D draft-dec-dhcpv6-route-option.  I
> posted a froth-at-the-mouth rant about this some while ago on nanog:
>
I probably missed the memo but *why* would you want to send the default 
gateway in a DHCPv6 response when the local network topology would 
*know* far more accurately what is going on.  Especially when you 
consider gateway failover and that in theory you do *not* need anything 
like VRRP/HSRP as the glue to do this.

> I.O.W. if the current situation with regard to RA and dhcpv6 leaves you
> speechless, your understanding of it is probably correct: that right now,
> you will need to use both RA and DHCPv6 in order to get "functional" host
> autoconfiguration.
> 
Well if the world, the network sysadmin's and venduh's learnt about SRV 
records and SLP, we would not be in this situation.  You can already get 
a feel of how things Should Work(tm) with multicast NTP and SAP/SDP, we 
just need the rest of the world to wake up.

*sigh*

Bear in mind as a *organisation* network monkey I do not need DHCP-PD, 
but that's what stateless DHCPv6 is all about.

Cheers

-- 
Alexander Clouter
.sigmonster says: You will be given a post of trust and responsibility.