On 8 Oct 2014, at 14:14, Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfis...@darou.fr> wrote:
>
> Why should we mandate homenet implementations to *brake* in situations where
> they could work fine ? Why should we voluntarily prevent a link from being
> configured if we actually can configure it ?
>
> If MUSTs are the solution, then I would rather see a ‘ISP MUST provide a /56
> to customers’ than ‘Homenet MUST brake when the provided prefix is not big
> enough’.
But this is what the homenet arch text says in Section 3.4.1:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-arch-17#section-3.4.1
i.e. don’t go longer than /64, and ISPs should provide enough prefixes.
The why64 text is very relevant here.
Tim
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
