In message <4e95096e.5020...@herberg.name> Ulrich Herberg writes: > Jari, > > On 10/11/11 12:05 PM, Jari Arkko wrote: > > Home routers would also have MAC addresses, but again, if we need a > > 32-bit quantity then shortened 48/64 bit identifiers may > > (theoretically) have collisions. > > > > That being said, if the home routers have to discover their IPv6 > > prefix through a protocol and store it in flash, they could probably > > do so also for a router ID. Unless there was some chicken and egg > > problem that required the router ID for all this discovery to work... > I agree. Since we need to configure unique prefixes to each router in > the home anyway, it should not be any problem to do the same for a > router ID (or even just use an address from the configured prefix as > router ID, which should then be unique). A while ago, there were some > plans in AUTOCONF to specify how to use DHCPv6 (-PD) in a multi-hop > network for configuring prefixes in the network. As in a home network, I > assume there is always at least one border router with the global > prefix, specifying something like that seems to be reasonable for me (in > a MANET, that can be more difficult, because there is not necessarily > such a central entity as the border router). > > Regards > Ulrich
Ulrich, Whatever ends up being specified should require no configuration and work when there are: zero border routers providing a prefix (outage and/or partition) one border router providing a prefix (the easy case) multiple border routers providing a prefix For the large apartment building example that Jim gave, we really should consider scaling behavior when there are a large number of border routers providing a prefix within a given mesh. Curtis _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
