Steven Barth <mailto:[email protected]>
12 March 2015 18:11
I have read this draft. It looks very good.
I agree (having reviewed probably all the various iterations of that
document).
I have the following questions:
1. What are the interoperability considerations if the node also
contains (historical) configuration for acting as an RFC7084 router?
Especially with respect to requirement L2 and L8.
I think that is more of an implementation matter not so much
draft-relevant. I mean sure if you design your OS from the ground up
with that in mind that would be easy. However in the reference
implementation we deliberately do not do that as that would require
emulating a lot of OS-specific behavior.
You can however replicate this configuration by defining the interface
as hnet with mode=leaf (i.e. always internal, not connected to routers
= doesn't speak RP nor HNCP on it) and you can give hnet a hint on
what size and or id of the prefix you want to have assigned.
As for L8 (running DHCPv6) hncp-04 has similar requirements, DHCPv6
behavior was at some point actually in the PA draft but it was moved
to hncp I suppose for clarity reasons though Pierre could probably
talk about this in more detail.
2. may/should/must a Homenet router that participates in the
draft-ietf-homenet-prefix-assignment-03.txt also act as a proxy for
an old RFC7084 router connected to one interface?
This - as well - is defined in hncp-04 instead and we do this in the
reference implementation. Internally the delegating router announces
the DP on behalf of the legacy router using HNCP and inserts a local
route.
Cheers,
Steven
I've just been testing this feature, which is why I asked ;)
/56 was requested by hnet router to ISP router.
/62 was (correctly) allocated to the 7084 router by the hnet router.
route to /62was (correctly) advertised by the hnet router into Homenet.
Is it not worth adding a couple of sentences to this draft?
At the end of Section 6:
Proxy: A proxy node is capable of acting on behalf of one or more
non-participating device(s) (e.g. a downstream RFC7084 compliant router)
in order to assign new prefixes, adopting, existing ones, making
overriding assignments and destroying existing ones on behalf of the
non-participating device(s). The exact mechanism to be deployed is
outside the scope of this draft. The proxy node SHOULD ensure that any
underlying topology discovery mechanism is stable and complete, before
acting as a proxy node, to avoid causing any race conditions. The proxy
node SHOULD also check that the network topology beyond the proxy node
is single attached to the set of participating nodes.
--
Regards,
RayH
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
