On 30.1.2014, at 17.50, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: > don’t want it in the routing protocol.
Why not? You can stick in kitchen sink there! ;-) >>> of routing protocols for that branch. I have assumed there is agreement to >>> have a single routing protocol in the home, and not support multiple. > I'm interested only in a routing protocol that works well with wired, > wireless, > and the internet of things. > > I don't think anyone will ever agree to a single routing protocol decision > unless the protocol meets those requirements well, and is battle tested > to meet those requirements well. And none do. The definition of ‘works’ varies by people, so by that definition, I don’t think there is much to see here. >> So question if we don't use the routing protocol for prefix assignment, what >> should go in there? Should we have a new protocol for service discovery? > It is my hope that hybrid-proxy-mdns solves this. Certainly mdns is pretty > good about picking up dynamically changed hybrid proxy fixes some things ( see https://github.com/sbyx/ohybridproxy for a minimalist implementation that seems to work, more or less ). However, it needs quite a bit of configuration on top of that that you can’t squeeze in easily; or at least, you wind up with either - configuration coming from some other protocol (like my old OSPF+SD draft), or - dns-updates + god DNS server + god DNS server replication within your home I’m not sure which is worse, but neither sounds very appealing. > It still seems that being able to distribute and route between /128s is > needed, > and nd proxying for folk that are only doing a /64 and have subnets. Lots of nodes still don’t do stateful DHCPv6 (and even fewer do AHCP or something else); obviously, we could just ignore them and point at RFC6434? Hmm. > 1) in the multi-homing case you want requests from a local dns server > to be sourced > from the right network to the right ISP-provided forwarder. (think > I have a fix for > that but it involves abandoning resolv.conf for specific dnsmasq > configuration. Does it really work without host changes? Let’s assume you have prefixes A and B from ISPs ISP_A, ISP_B. You have host that has addresses in A and B. It chooses to point it’s upstream resolver at your dnsmasq on your router. How do you figure which upstream DNS server to use? A and B source address won’t help in this case, as DNS resolution is done with ‘point SOMETHING at configured DNS server’ in most current hosts. > 4) the vast increase in ipv6 related multicast led me to finally > violate the 802.11 standard and > fix wireless multicast rates to 9mbits. So far that hasn’t broken anything. Oho. Do you have concrete numbers on how much multicast you’re seeing in and what sort of topology? Just base IPv6 stuff or e.g. mdns? Cheers, -Markus _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
