Mysterious missing DHCPv6 feature, was Re: How does one obtain an IPv6 DNS server when VPNing to an ASA?

[Mark Smith]

On Mon, 17 May 2010 08:44:30 +0200 (CEST)
sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:

> > > 	DHCP to hand out DNS servers, NTP servers on request, and do
> > > 	dynamic update for the forward and reverse DNS maps.
> > 
> > And the new feature you were looking for was to hand out a default-gw, 
> > right? That's the "this" feature you were referring to and IETF didn't 
> > want to do?
> 
> I'm glad to see such patches (I'm tempted to say "about time").
> 
> I would of course be even happier to see a *standardized* solution to
> let DHCPv6 hand out a default gateway. The lack of such a feature (and
> the strong religious opposition to it in certain circles), despite clear
> statements from several big operators that they need it, is one of the
> significant factors hampering IPv6 deployment.
> 

I don't think so.

What I think is hampering deployment is people constantly discussing
and debating design decisions that they don't agree with, 10 to 15
years after they were made, rather than accepting them, and getting on
with deploying it. It may not be perfect in their opinion (and it
isn't in mine), but then usually nothing ever is - it's all about trade
offs. The pressing problem is deployment.

I'm also getting tired of the "the IETF didn't talk to us" arguement. If
the operators want to be listened to, they need *participate* in the
IETF, not complain about it. That means writing or reviewing Internet
Drafts, and posting well formed opinions about them if you have them.
In my experience, "The IETF" will listen to them, and if their
useful, place value on them, regardless of your background, or how silly
your email address looks. You might also get some credit in the
drafts/RFCs if you make a significant enough contribution.

(btw, I'd mostly much rather DHCPv6 didn't exist at all. It only really
exists in IPv6 because it exists in IPv4, and it only really exists in
IPv4 because IPv4's node addressing wasn't big enough to do autoconf,
unlike IPX's, DECNETs, CLNS etc. But people have got used to 'database
driven' address assignment, so it was inevitable that it'd exist in
IPv6)