IPv6 Deployment for the LAN

[mmc at internode.com.au (Matthew Moyle-Croft)]

Amen to that Randy.

MMC

Randy Bush wrote:
>>> This would be a big mistake. Fate sharing between the device that
>>> advertises the presence of a router and the device that forwards packets
>>> makes RAs much more robust than DHCPv4.
>>>       
>> No, what we want are better first hop redundancy protocols, and DHCP for
>> v6, so that everyone who has extracted any value from DHCP in their toolkit
>> can continue to do so, and roll out v6 !
>>     
>
> no.  what we need is more religious v6 fanatics to make use of v6 hard
> to roll out on existing networks.  after all, v6 is soooo wonderful we
> should be happy to double our opex for the privilege of using such a
> fantastic protocol.
>
> v6 fanaticism has done vastly more damage to v6 deployment than the v6
> haters.  arrogance kills.
>
> randy
>
>