> You can do that today. For instance, this is what I have in a test =
> setup. (However, the ISC dhcpd can only do either v4 or v6, not both at =
> the same time.)
Which is a limitation that we intend to address. It was more time
sensitive to get a DHCPv6 server out there than a integrated
DHCPv4/DHCPv6 server. No date has been set for this yet.
> subnet6 2001:960:7bf:d::/64
> option dhcp6.name-servers 2001:1af8:2:5::2;
> option dhcp6.domain-search "bonjour.muada.nl";
> range6 2001:960:7bf:d::1000 2001:960:7bf:d::1fff;
Just need to add default route in there and make dhcpd do RA
then the user can turn off RA on their routers and not care
that DHCPv6 doesn't include default router.
Future proof, if/when it gets added natively too it'll just carry
on with no reconfig.
Having a DHCP server generate RA messages kind of defeats the point of
having RA messages
in the first place, resulting in loss of robustness, and now a new
mode of failure.
The point of having RA messages is they are simple, and integrated
into the routers,
so there is not a separate server to fail (a "DHCP server") to cause
loss of connectivity,
due to server appliances (computers) being less reliable than routers.
With the RA integrated into the routers properly, clients can
(and establish connectivity, provided DNS details obtained in the past), even
if DHCP server(s) should fail.
And by "new" here you mean "exactly the same mode of failure that's been around for decades but hasn't been so serious as to be the downfall of internetworking".
I don't mean to rain on your parade here...oh wait, yeah, I do actually.
I have an SGI Indigo (MIPS R3000/25 with 32MB RAM baby, it's a
screamer!) that still runs with no problems. Show me an eighteen year
old router that's still up and running. The Dell hardware we ran NT4
Server on for providing DHCP until I replaced it is still as functional
today as it was when it was purchased in 1998. I have a five year old
Cisco doorstop. Don't tell me routers are made of magic hardware that
is somehow immune to failure.