Running DHCPv6 relay without interfaces
clists at buxtonfamily.us
Thu Mar 14 17:40:54 UTC 2013
On Mar 14, 2013, at 10:31 AM, Peter Rathlev wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-03-14 at 10:10 -0700, Chris Buxton wrote:
>> On Mar 14, 2013, at 6:40 AM, Peter Rathlev wrote:
>>> For DHCPv6 you could also route the FF02::1:2 address to the DHCP server
>>> but that would require L3 multicast routing.
>> I believe the correct address for site-wide routing of the request
>> would be FF05::1:2, not FF02::1:2. Multicast routing is something that
>> should be implemented in an IPv6 world.
> Hmm... We're an enterprise and for us it's probably relatively easy to
> implement company wide, but multicast routing in the Internet?
No, you misunderstood my meaning. I meant within a site, not across the Internet. If your DHCPv6 server is not in the same site as the clients, then unless you're using vlans to bridge sites together (not my recommendation), you'll need at least one DHCPv6 relay at the client site.
I was just pointing out that within a site, there is a potential alternative to relays. I was not saying that relays are bad in any way. But v6 multicast routing within a site makes a lot of sense to me.
More information about the dhcp-users