>> Both HNCP and Babel carry their control traffic over link-local IPv6, but
>> they support both IPv4 and IPv6 with almost equal functionality.
>>
>> (The only significant difference is the treatment of border routers, which
>> are assumed to be doing NAT in IPv4 and stateless routing in IPv6.)
On Mar 2, 2019, at 8:50 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> That's an property of the hnetd implementation, not a feature of the
> protocol (and it doesn't apply to shncpd). See RFC 7788 Section 6.5.
The text:
An HNCP router MUST create a private IPv4 prefix [RFC1918
> Both HNCP and Babel carry their control traffic over link-local IPv6, but
> they support both IPv4 and IPv6 with almost equal functionality.
> in fact while what you are saying is technically true, in practice IPv4
> _is_ treated like a second-class citizen in the sense that if your
>
... if your ISP-provided public IP address ever goes away, all of your RFC1918
addresses on the homenet also go away.
Not in any router I’ve ever had a hand in specifying or procuring! And
not true of my Netgear router, or any of my older Linksys routers. Or OpenWRT
loaded routers. My RFC1918
> For the last 10 to 15 years the ISP-provided home router has come to
> dominate the market, with the belief by the ISPs that this is a MUST that they
> control the device. Many (but not all) at the IETF do not share this view,
> but
> most non-technical users see the ISP provided router is
Ralf Weber wrote:
> Moin!
> On 2 Mar 2019, at 1:14, Michael Richardson wrote:
>> I personally do not believe that Home Router firmware update practices
have
>> significantly improved. I would welcome more recent data: is anyone
>> collecting this on a regular basis? I
On 3/2/19 8:30 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
What I meant is that homenet router protocols are v6 only.
No, they're not.
Both HNCP and Babel carry their control traffic over link-local IPv6, but
they support both IPv4 and IPv6 with almost equal functionality.
(The only significant
On Mar 2, 2019, at 11:30 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> No, they're not.
>
> Both HNCP and Babel carry their control traffic over link-local IPv6, but
> they support both IPv4 and IPv6 with almost equal functionality.
This is one of the reasons that I would like us to get together and hack on
> What I meant is that homenet router protocols are v6 only.
No, they're not.
Both HNCP and Babel carry their control traffic over link-local IPv6, but
they support both IPv4 and IPv6 with almost equal functionality.
(The only significant difference is the treatment of border routers, which
are
Moin!
On 2 Mar 2019, at 1:14, Michael Richardson wrote:
I personally do not believe that Home Router firmware update practices
have
significantly improved. I would welcome more recent data: is anyone
collecting this on a regular basis? I suspect that 90% of firmware
updates
occur because
10 matches
Mail list logo
