Re: How IPv6 host gets DNS address

[Bob Hinden <hinden@iprg.nokia.com>]

Doug,

>The problem with this argument is that it's a slippery slope. It sounds
>totally reasonable to say, "As long as we have X, we might as well
>include Y." However, the address(es) of the recursive name servers
>aren't that useful without a search list. Then, once you get into a
>windows environment you really need the netbios name server address....
>etc. Once you get done with that, you've invented something that looks
>an awful lot like dhcp.

To clarify by slippery slope, I think you mean creating two sets of options 
(e.g., one for DHCPv6 and one for RA's) as both DHCPv6 and IPv6 neighbor 
discovery are existing protocols.  It seems to be this can easily be 
avoided by creating an ND option that can carry a DHCPv6 option.  The ND 
options are <type><length> form so it should be easy to define a new one 
that said the contents was a DHCPv6 option.   This seems very simple to me.

I also note that the current list of DHCPv6 option drafts listed on the DHC 
w.g.'s charter that are relevant is fairly short (DNS, Time, NIS, and two 
DSTM IDs) and as far as I can tell only the first three have current 
drafts.  I think it is very unlikely that there is going to be a need for 
options for nbios, IPX, etc. with IPv6.

So perhaps even in the worst case the slippery slope isn't that 
steep.  Note, I do think think we can keep this under control and limit RAs 
to the most basic services.  The addresses of the recursive DNS servers is 
what I think is needed the most.

Bob

#----------------------------------------------------------------------
# To unsubscribe, send a message to <dnsop-request@cafax.se>.