incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] IPv6 support draft functional spec(phase 1)
Date Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:15:17 GMT


On 01/21/2013 07:21 PM, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
> DHCPv6 does not support/allow you to send default gateway.  This is ³by
> design².
>

Yes, you are right! I completely forgot that.

So Router Advertisements are the only way to go in this case indeed.

> I don't get the same "rushed" feeling as you do.
> There's > 200 RFCs for IPv6. It is a large and complicated topic and not
> many people have experience with it (see above). I feel that it is best to
> approach it incrementally and learn our lessons along the way.
>

We just have to make sure that the *experimental* label stays on it and 
warn that stuff can change.

Wido

> On 1/20/13 10:33 AM, "Wido den Hollander" <wido@widodh.nl> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 01/17/2013 04:11 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> The first draft of IPv6 FS is available at
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/IPv6+support
>>> now.
>>>
>>> Basically based on our previous discussion, we would like to stick to
>>> dnsmasq, and assume shared network for advance zone in the phase one,
>>> to make thing as simple as possible in phase 1.
>>>
>>> Comments/questions are welcome!
>>>
>>
>> What's the reason for not doing this in basic networking first? Isn't
>> that the easiest one?
>>
>> I'm getting the feeling that this implementation will be rushed in by
>> just skipping a lot of things just to get *some* IPv6 in CloudStack.
>>
>> We can't just add IPv6 and say *experimental* because people will start
>> using it.
>>
>> And why is there a need for radvd when using DHCPv6?
>>
>> Wido
>>
>>> --Sheng
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message