Ok, we will make it public in this week.
The page for the project is here: https://github.com/t-routing/
traffic-class-routing-system-based-on-OSPFv3
Thanks, but could you please point us at your code? That's a full
Quagga tree merged with a full Click tree, with no development history.
On 19.11.2013, at 12.22, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr
wrote:
Ok, we will make it public in this week.
The page for the project is here: https://github.com/t-routing/
traffic-class-routing-system-based-on-OSPFv3
Thanks, but could you please point us at your code?
(i.e. have a configuration option to use the Framed-IPv6-Prefix value in
the prefix exclude option instead of an RA)
Correction, the above is incorrect, as has been rightly pointed.
Are there any cases where the Framed-IPv6-Prefix value will not be copied
as-is in the OPTION_PD_EXCLUDE value?
Hello (thanks for the answer),
The uplink connection between the delegating and the requesting router will
be in many cases enumerated with a prefix dictated by the
Framed-IPv6-Prefix value. If this uplink prefix is going to be a part of
the greater prefix that will be delegated, we would in
Just a general reminder. If you crosspost, make sure you also have subscribed
to the lists you CC.
- Jouni (RADEXT co-chair)
On Nov 19, 2013, at 2:07 PM, Bernie Volz (volz) v...@cisco.com wrote:
Why would it ever be copied into that option? That makes no sense to me.
- Bernie (from iPad)
It's probably just a remark/side note, but pd_exclude could also be used with
DHCPv6 iso RA on the WAN-link. I've not bumped in to many customers using RA
on WAN links to number them, not with separate prefix nor with excluded prefix,
so the typical use case will be to get/use an excluded
I guess from RFC 4818, Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is used for PD. Whereas it says:
The Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4] is not designed to support
delegation of IPv6 prefixes to be used in the user's network, and
therefore Framed-IPv6-Prefix and Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attributes may
be
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Bernie Volz (volz) v...@cisco.com wrote:
I guess from RFC 4818, Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is used for PD. Whereas it
says:
The Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4] is not designed to support
delegation of IPv6 prefixes to be used in the user's network, and
No, indeed, you don't really need pd_exclude, but it saves admin on not having
to use separate ia_pd and ia_na
Regs
Carl
From: Roberta Maglione (robmgl) [mailto:rob...@cisco.com]
Sent: dinsdag 19 november 2013 16:17
To: Wuyts Carl; Athanasios Douitsis; Bernie Volz (volz)
Cc: rad...@ietf.org;
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Roberta Maglione (robmgl) rob...@cisco.com
wrote:
Perhaps if the case is as in your example (Framed-IPv6-Prefix is
contained by Delegated-IPv6-Prefix, but not equal) then using the
Framed-IPv6-Prefix for OPTION_PD_EXCLUDE makes some sense?
Maybe it could
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Jouni Korhonen jouni.nos...@gmail.comwrote:
3GPP system uses these in the above manner i.e. Framed-IPv6-Prefix - what
you put into RA, Delegated-IPv6-Prefix - what you delegate via DHCPv6. And
in this case what was in Framed-IPv6-Prefix goes into
Hello,
Thanks for the comments!
Indeed in a scenario where all the requesting routers connecting to a
delegating router (BNG) would have PD_EXCLUDE capability, using the
Framed-IPv6-Prefix to infer what to put into the OPTION_PD_EXCLUDE field is
sufficient.
But if there is a mix of
12 matches
Mail list logo
