>>>>> "Iljitsch" == Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
Iljitsch> On 2-aug-2007, at 21:17, Dave Crocker wrote:
>>> It was also interesting to open the Mac network control
>>> pannel, enable my Airport (WLAN) interface, and see the IPv6
>>> global address appear almost instantaneously and in many case
>>> having to wait many seconds to minutes for DHCP provided IPv4
>>> address to appear.
>> Any chance this was merely due to a difference in scaling, with
>> IPv4 DHCP usage being large-scale and IPv6 being small?
>> I suppose the more constructive way to ask this is: Does anyone
>> know why one worked better than the other?
Iljitsch> I don't think there was any IPv6 DHCP, and if there was,
Iljitsch> most hosts wouldn't have used it because they don't
Iljitsch> implement it. The advantage of stateless autoconf over
Iljitsch> DHCP is that with stateless autoconf, a singe router
Iljitsch> advertisement multicast to all IPv6 hosts can provide an
Iljitsch> unlimited number of hosts with address information (the
Iljitsch> hosts still need to do duplicate address detection, but
Iljitsch> since no reply means success it's hard to fail here) so
Iljitsch> it's eminently more scalable than DHCP.
Let's be clear here. The scaling properties of stateless autoconf are
better than DHCP in cases where I want to give a uniform configuration
to all nodes on the link and where all the configuration I want to
hand out is supported by stateless autoconf.
Issues such as giving hosts hostnames, dynamic dns updates, etc can
change to the scalining properties of the entire IPV6 configuration
experience to be different than the base scaling properties of
stateless autoconf.
--Sam
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf