v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)]

> Your routers fail frequently? And does your traffic continue to get
> forwarded? Perhaps through another router?

More frequently than the DHCP server, but neither are "frequent" events.
Cisco's software is not 100% perfect, and when you plug it into moderately
unstable things like phone lines (DSL) and cable networks, those little
bugs cause reloads -- you'd think they'd have better error handling, but
they don't. (I don't buy millions in equipment from Cisco so they don't
care about my problems.) While I could use backup links, flip-floping
between ISPs with different addresses is not ideal (and that's as true for
v6 as v4.)

> Why is there a problem with RAs being the first step, possibly including
> prefix info or possibly just hinting @ DHCPv6?

Because it doesn't fit the needs of *every* network. In fact, it's only
"good enough" for very few networks. As such it just adds more useless
layers of bloat.

  Good. You admit it fits the needs of some networks.

> Well, as it stands now the RA isn't useless.
> Also, it is not true in every case that hosts need a "lot more" than an
> address.
> In many cases all my machine needs is an address, default gateway and DNS
> server (cheat off of v4 | RFC5006 | Stateless DHCPv6).

It's useless. It does NOT provide enough information alone for a host to

  Hogwash. The only thing needed for I used from DHCP on my
  laptop is router, address and netmask. I actually discard
  anything else that is offered. RA's meet my needs perfectly
  fine. In fact they do a better job than DHCP for my needs.

  I don't trust dns servers returned by dhcp. Lots of them
  don't offer the level of functionality I require. I run
  my own recursive resolver to get the level of functionality
  I require.