What's better RADVD or DHCPv6 for local network with IPv6?

Question

today I got a new router and now I want to enable IPv6 on my network. But the thing is I don't know what the better option is since TP-Link gives me two ways to get IPv6 on my network.

The first option is RADVD and second option is DHCPv6. Now my question is which is the best solution? And if RADVD is better, should I enable RDNSS and ULA?

Thanks in advance.

Solution

You need at least radvd. Router advertisements communicate to devices on the network what the default gateway is and what the network configuration is. You always need that.

The router advertisement can tell clients whether they are allowed to choose their own addresses or not (auto configuration). If you allow this then you might not need DHCP at all.

Then you can add DHCP, either stateless or stateful. Stateless DHCP tells clients configuration options like DNS resolvers etc without providing addresses (useful if you allow auto configuring). Stateful DHCP also provides addresses.

As you need radvd anyway it's the easiest, possibly combined with stateless DHCP. Don't bother with stateful DHCP unless you really need to manage addresses manually.

Comments

[Admin]

Do you actually have a IPv6 internet connection?

[Admin]

Yes, I have an IPv6 connection.

[Admin]

RA advertising is fast and automatic with EUI-64 advertisements and can be done from almost every router these days (good for home and small networks). DHCPv6 might be better for enterprise because of the extra control. Note that Android has dropped the ball and still does not support DHCPv6 to this day: nullzero.co.uk/…

[MAX]

Thank you for your answer. But I can only choose between RADVD delegated/static or DHCPv6 delegated/static. So I can't really combine them.

[MAX]

Do you have any idea which of these I should choose now? And if you say RADVD, should I also enable the RDNS-Service?

[Sander Steffann]

Radvd with rdnss sounds good