SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Wednesday November 07 2018, @03:12AM
from the BAD-design-(Broken-As-Designed) dept.
from the BAD-design-(Broken-As-Designed) dept.
In June 2012, an owner of a Samsung Galaxy Nexus running Android 4.0.2 opened a case in Google's Issue Tracker requesting support for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6, otherwise known as DHCPv6, or RFC 3315, which allows for stateful address and connection configuration on devices joining an IPv6 network. DHCPv6, like DHCPv4, is commonly used in enterprise networks for connecting devices.
For the last six years — including through five new major versions of Android — that request has languished, when this week it was marked as "Won't Fix (Intended Behavior)" by Google engineer Lorenzo Colitti. Android is effectively the only platform which lacks support for DHCPv6, making the IPv6 implementation on Android incomplete.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Android's Lack of DHCPv6 Support Frustrates Enterprise Network Admins
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 17 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
"The subspace _W inherits the other 8 properties of _V. And there aren't
even any property taxes."
-- J. MacKay, Mathematics 134b
(Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Wednesday November 07 2018, @05:03PM (2 children)
The Internet of Things is a buzzword, but I have never seen an IoT device that needed a public IPv4 IP. And I have never seen a user who signed up for an internet connection just to get their IoT device online. The crunch is not effected in the slightest by IoT marketing wank.
There isn't a single magic moment for everyone, we are in the middle of a decades long journey. Mobile IPv6 support is ubiquitous, desktop support is ubiquitous, server (application) support is still a work in progress on the whole. Residential deployment of IPv6 is widespread in my area, almost no-one who is using it even realizes it. The desktops and phones are connected to home routers which (when less than ~5 years old) on the whole tend to support IPv6 and everything "just works". Every year more and more IPv6 is getting lit, and for the most part no-one notices, and that is exactly how it should be. The big resistance I see is from the business side of the house, but they will catch up in time, first we need to train a generation of engineers on IPv6.
What is broken on the whole is IPv6 DNS. Not the servers, the client config. So the end result is that all the real world IPv6 usage I have ever seen resolved DNS over IPv4. DHCPv6 is one solution for this problem, perhaps not my first pick, but a solution none the less.
(Score: 1) by Mike on Thursday November 08 2018, @01:48AM (1 child)
I'm curious what is missing on the client config? My understanding is that the ipv6 autoconfig can supply a DNS server (i.e. at a ipv6 address).
(Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Thursday November 08 2018, @05:26PM
The IETF went through the trouble of demanding strict separation along layers and then decided to adopt an RFC for RA-DNS after the fact. I'd rather adopt SSDP or equivalent to advertise arbitrary config options instead, no need to add a RFC for every new config parameter, while still getting away from our layer bluring DHCP all together in stateless deployments. Using a generalized service discovery protocol to discover DNS/NTP/PXE/SIP/Whatever either all in one place, or directly from the relevant servers.
ND-RDNSS or RFC 6106/8106 support is growing, admittedly faster that I realized according to the usual unreliable sources [wikipedia.org]. Big win that Win10 finally got it in April. But I still haven't seen it used in the wild, likely my experience is stale. IPv6 prefix delegation got pushed out to the hoi polloi while I had my back turned, mayhaps NS-RDNSS did as well.
For better or worse DHCPv4 became a vehicle for arbitrary configuration strings. Which makes it likely that if only via inertia DHCPv6 is still going to make more sense for the distribution of higher level config parameters if you have any DHCPv4 options other than DNS/Gateway.