>>> (3) it is impossible to act as a dumb DNCP forwarder without publishing >>> a Node-State TLV and a full set of Neighbor sub-TLVs. > >> This is not true. Given basic bridging of ‘remember one guy on end of >> each link’, you can do essentially bridging.
so my use case (wanting routers without any ipv6 ips, just the fe80::, to be able to forward requests onward) is merely a limitation of the implementation? > > Same issue as above. > >>> This will require changing the algorithm in Section 5.4 (since the >>> neighbor graph is no longer necessarily connected). > >> That will result in state hanging around forever unless we introduce >> some TTL scheme alongside it. Considering the main design goal of DNCP >> is _not_ to have TTLs in the protocol, > > Ah. Right. I'm an idiot. > > Please make this rationale more explicit in the draft -- it's said in the > introduction, please repeat it in Section 5.4. > > I'll think about it some more, but I think you've convinced me -- I don't > see a good way to avoid the state explosion without giving up on the > link-state nature of DNCP. (Which I understand is not likely to happen.) I had hoped for DNCP to be merely AHCP on a steroid, not the explosion of complexity that resulted. I have kind of been evolving something rather different. What I do right now leverages the source specific information in the routing protocol to assume that whatever is exporting a source specific default /60 or /56 route has a whatever::1 address in the first prefix of that, then self assigns itself a SLAAC/128 address out of the topmost /64, then uses curl over https to contact each for a potential prefix and other configuration information. Tis nothin but a bunch of itty bitty shell scripts like: getdefgws() { ip -6 route | grep '^default from' | grep / | while read d f addr via splat do mask=`echo $addr | cut -f2 -d/` a=`echo $addr | cut -f1 -d/` echo $a/$mask done } with stuff to measure the shortest and fastest paths (traceroute or ping)... and a bit of lua. distinct advantages are not having to upgrade any routers in the path with a new daemon, implicit security of the https, the state primarily lives on the source specific gw. disadvatages are tis hard to write it all in a shell script, and I imagine someone will object to someone treating somewhere::1 as a "special" indicator of an IP being available for configuration purposes, and no doubt more... -- Dave Täht What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet