Re: radvd or dhcp
On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 04:44:24PM +0200, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> > so why is there radvd?
>
> Good question.
RA is a stateless protocol; as a result, it does not require as much CPU
power as is the case for DHCP, and also unlike DHCP doesn't need to keep
a database of leases which it's sent out. If you don't need all the
time/DNS/whatever server configuration synchronized in a large network
(because, say, you have a setup that allows you to synchronize
configuration when it actually changes, rather than only when your lease
expires), then running radvd (or another implementation of router
advertisement) can help you get rid of a maintenance and processor time
overhead that you don't need anyway.
Ultimately, what you use depends very much on what you want and what
your requirements are. Personally, I use DHCP for v4 addresses (because
there's no other modern way of distributing IP address configuration for
v4); and since I use that already anyway, I also use it to distribute
DNS server configuration. As such, I have no need to distribute DNS
server configuration for v6 anymore, so I prefer to do that through RA.
--
Shaw's Principle:
Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will
want to use it.
Reply to: