Re: Bug#632915: ifupdown: DHCPv6 support

[Bjørn Mork <bjorn@mork.no>]

Jason White <jason@jasonjgw.net> writes:
> Bjørn Mork  <bjorn@mork.no> wrote:
>
>>Nope, sorry.  isc-dhcp-client  has no support for ppp interfaces, which
>>makes it useless for lots of people.  See e.g. xs4all's IPv6 access
>>service.
>
> I have a similar need: the ISP provides DHCPv6 prefixes using prefix
> delegation, e.g., a /60. This has to be obtained on a PPP interface, but then
> I need to assign a /64 based on the prefix to another interface, e.g., eth0.
>
> I wasn't able to make ISC DHCP assign the prefix to a second interface. Wide
> DHCPv6 can be used in this application, however.
>
> There is also dibbler-client, the capabilities of which I have not
> had time to investigate in detail.

Dunno if that has changed, but I believe I had problems delegating
anything bigger than a /64 to dibbler the last time I tried it (just
took the whole PD prefix and configured a single interface). 

This is a long time ago, so please don't take my word for it. My memory
is failing all the time, and things may also have changed since then.
Please test for yourself and report here.

> A further consideration is whether Wide DHCpv6 is maintained upstream - it
> appears not to be.

That's my impression as well.  There doesn't seem to be any activity at
all from the upstream maintainer(s).

The Debian maintainer is doing a great job, but the main problem with
Wide DHCPv6 is the lack of an upstream.  Kind of begs for someone to
just take it...

If it helps anyone on the way I imported the sources with all available
history from sourceforge to git a while ago (OK, it's close to a year
now...) and added the Debian specific patches and a couple on my own
account: http://git.mork.no/?p=wide-dhcpv6.git

I was playing with the thought of taking the upstream role, but being
realistic: 
 a) I don't have the necessary skills, and
 b) I don't have the necessary time


ISC DHCP may be the way forward.  At least it has an active upstream and
will most likely continue to have that.  I do however believe that the
attempt to integrate DHCP and DHCPv6 support in the same client is a big
mistake.  The protocols are very different, and the attempt to reuse
code is causing more problems than it solves.  Like the inability to run
over ppp.  

Someone from ISC mentioned a possibility of a lightweight DHCPv6-only
client in a discussion a couple of years ago.  Would be very interesting
if that ever happened.




Bjørn