ipv6 network fail (newbie alert)

[Noel Butler]

On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 14:02 +0000, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> On 21/03/2013 13:12, Brandon Ross wrote:
> > On Thu, 21 Mar 2013, Noel Butler wrote:
> > 
> >> Since you earlier said you static assigned IP's I see no point in
> >> allowing NDP (but I too are no ipv6 expert)
> > 
> > Mileage may vary, but the standards require that your perform duplicate
> > address detection, even when using static addresses, so leaving NDP
> > functional is a good idea.
> 
> More than that, I think. Assigning static addresses is a clear invitation
> to assigning duplicate addresses by a slip of the keyboard. In any case,
> you can't prevent unruly hosts performing SLAAC. DAD is unavoidable.
> 
>    Brian


Depends on your usage, my only IPv6 usage is on servers, surely you are
not going to suggest they get anything other than static.
If it's a home network, you may have a valid point.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20130322/5912ea3d/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20130322/5912ea3d/attachment.bin