[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: IPv6 status on Debian for workstations / DHCP networks?



On 05/07/13 16:38, Michael Richardson wrote:
> Daniel Pocock <daniel@pocock.com.au> wrote:
>     >> dhcpd does not have to run on the router.  DHCPv6 servers are found by
>     >> multicast.  Unless you set M=1 in your RAs, your hosts will not use
>     >> DHCPv6 for address allocation, so it makes little sense to attempt to
>     >> tie DNS updates to DHCPv6 in my opinion.
>
>     > I've configured radvd on the router for M=1 - so all hosts should be
>     > using DHCPv6 and therefore DDNS should be maintained
>
> okay.... my observation is that client side dhcpv6 is unusual still at this
> point.  Certainly none of my phone/tablet devices will do that, and they all
> speak ipv6 RA just fine.

I agree that the RA stuff works fine - the problem is getting DDNS to
work.  Many people currently drive DDNS updates from their DHCP server.

Do you prefer to use client-initiated DDNS updates or some other solution?


>
>     >> If you want DNS servers from the RA, then you need a seperate daemon.
>
>     > Ok, thanks for that feedback
>
>     > So the default Debian installation (with nothing in interfaces) would
>     > only use SLAAC and not try stateful DHCPv6 at all - so a site admin who
>     > wants to allow "anything" to just plug in and work should not set M=1
>     > in the RA?
>
> Yes.
> You *could* try advertising run two prefixes on the same subnet, one with
> M=1, other with M=0.  I don't know how clients that had dhcpv6 would respond
> to that.   Or if it's wireless devices, I'd run two ESSIDs.

I think that more tightly controlled sites can experiment with that -
but how should vendors of home routers support IPv6, for example?

Currently, if you take a default install of OpenWRT on a router, it can
provide a convenient DHCP + DDNS experience for IPv4 that "just works"
with no setup required.  I'm yet to see that the same "plug and play"
experience is possible with IPv6 - I agree it is possible in theory, but
I'm not sure about the way it people have been implementing it.


>     > One issue I've observed on older machines that have been upgraded is
>     > that the IPv6 setting in NetworkManager is sometimes set to "Ignored"
>     > while on fresh installs it is in "Automatic" mode - so people who have
>     > upgraded need to go in and change that or they won't experience dual
>     > stack.
>
> I can believe it.
> On my new laptop, I tried NM again, and it has a habit of opening a hundred
> WPA passphrase requests :-)

We have a laptop at home near the edge of the wifi zone that regularly
gets into that state - if nobody uses it for a few days, there are 1,000
popups open



Reply to: