Re: pppd's defaultroute option

[Gert Doering <gert%greenie.muc.de@localhost>]

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 09:10:16AM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> I'm glad you agree with the IPv6 architects.

Well, just for the record - "the IPv6 architects" are a cabal that cannot
agree with *themselves* on anything, plus, half of that stuff was designed
for an Internet of 20 years ago...

So, yes, having DHCPv6-PD and no-NAT is a cool thing (undoubtedly!), but
how exactly does DHCPv6-PD help with "no default route", given that 
the oh-so-wise architects decided that "no, DHCPv6 doesn't deal with
routing info"?

So, it will work if you have a remote end that sends you RAs - but it will
not give you a default route if the remote only does DHCPv6...

But independent of all the religion, I can't see a good reason why it
would be "wrong against whatever truth" to just permit pppd to install
a defaultroute if you know you need one, instead of having to write a 
script to do it...  not all setups are borne equal, and "the other end
not sending RA" does not mean "you have to run NAT on your side".

(And please refer to the RFC that says Having A Default-Route Option In
PPPD Is Totally Frowned Upon).

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert%greenie.muc.de@localhost
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert%net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de@localhost