In message <17d930d0-572c-482e-8be7-e782e4930...@townsley.net> Mark Townsley writes: > > it would seem that we only have 3 choices once we run out of /64s to > give out on links that for whatever reason we cannot bridge on. > > 1. No IPv6 > 2. NAT IPv6 > 3. MLSRv2 (if what you propose works, I don't yet see why it wouldn't) > > I think this is a case of what is the least bad option. We shouldn't > ignore the problem though. > > - Mark
There is no reason to give out /64 or shorter to every link. A prefix longer than /64 is not *globally* routeable. It is locally routeable. > On Oct 9, 2011, at 6:38 PM, Ole Troan wrote: > > > Erik, et al, > > > > to expand on the ideas I presented on MLSR (or rather MLSRv2 as it hasn't > > really been described anywhere) as a method for numbering a routed home. > > please let me be clear that I'm not convinced this is a good idea. i.e. why > > not just get < /64? > > I do think we could get something working though. > > > > routers can be in an arbitrary topology. all routers running a routing > > protocol. > > the site prefix (/64) is either advertised in the IGP with a new LSA or > > proxying of RA messages is done (split horizon). > > a router advertises the same /64 prefix (in a PIO) on all of its > > interfaces. L bit is 0. > > > > the link model here is that all hosts are off link from each other. > > link-local scope is restricted to only the physical link. multicast > > link-local scope as well. > > > > a host uses SLAAC (or DHCP) to create an address, then does DAD as normal. > > the first hop router uses it's routing topology database > > to check for conflicts. similar mechanisms described in SAVI are used to > > glean address information from the host. the SAVI binding > > database is then used to inject host routes into the IGP. > > > > this requires no flooding of ND, or any other changes to on-link protocols > > for loop detection. no changes in hosts either. > > only downside is that it requires a host to have sent a packet of some form > > for the SAVI binding to be initiated. > > it might also be possible to support host mobility with the home with this > > mechanism. > > > > cheers, > > Ole _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
