[ipv6hackers] Help with business case for RDNSS

Jim Small jim.small at cdw.com
Fri Aug 24 05:49:56 CEST 2012

> > Just to follow up on something Marc mentioned in a new thread:
> >> OS implementations at various stages what they
> >> support and what not (any OS beside Ubuntu that can get the DNS server
> >> from something else than DHCP6?) - and the IPv6 stacks are not well
> >> tested enough (see the number of issues found of IPv6 security issues
> >> for example, compared to IPv4 security issues in the top-5 OS used).
> >
> > I would like to advocate for RDNSS.  However, when I have asked for it the
> response was show us a compelling business case.  The question was
> genuine - if I can show a business case there are proponents of RDNSS.  The
> challenge is that most things support stateless DHCPv6 just fine.  Configuring
> stateless DHCPv6 is pretty easy so why do we need RDNSS?
> >
> > Everything I've thought of - embedded, SOHO, Labs - stateless DHCPv6
> works fine.  So I'm somewhat stumped - I like the idea of RDNSS because it
> seems easier to just add an line/option in a config for DNS via RA.  However,
> justifying additional coding for developers requires a better argument.
> >
> > Can anyone think of some good business/use cases?
> Some people don't want the overhead of running a DHCP server. Not all
> routers support DHCPv6 servers and even the ones that do, there are
> reasons not to want to tie up your router doing DHCP just for DNS servers to
> be issued.

My understanding is that with things like this:

And the fact that DHCPv6 is ported to Linux, that DHCPv6 support is pretty much cheap and trivial.  While I agree with you in spirit - I would very much like RDNSS for SOHO and Lab like environments, I don't see how to make a compelling business case given the above.  What am I missing?


More information about the Ipv6hackers mailing list