> Much will depend if the ISP is offering their customer a ‘graceful’ > renumbering event. If they do, then the principle applied in RFC4192 > could be applied, and you will have a period where both prefixes (old > and new) co-exist, before the old prefix is removed. In that case, the > older connections can be retained, at least until that removal.
I don't think that HNCP announces the "deprecated" status of a delegated prefix, so there's no way for an HNCP node to propagate it from the delegated to the assigned prefix. Markus, Steven, Pierre? > The interesting thing here is that many people (in my view quite > rightly) like the whole ‘fate sharing’ principle of a prefix, a router > and an RA. I happen to belong to that group of people, but I don't think that's the issue here. > The ‘problem’ with DHCP is that if the outing information changes, > a default gateway learnt from a DHCP server may well become stale / out > of date information. The default gateway should be fine, at least most of the time (every Homenet router can act as a default gateway as long as the Homenet remains connected). The main issue is that once you've given out an IPv4 lease, there's no easy way to tell the client, "oh, sorry, I just gave you this nice IPv4 address, but the Homenet's prefix assignment consensus is that we should renumber, could you please release the address and I'll give you another one ASAP". As Markus explained to me, this should not be an issue in practice, since IPv4 renumbering is rare due to NAT, and the adoption mechanism in the PA algorithm should avoid renumbering when a router crashes. FORCERENEW with Nonce authentication might also be helpful, I'm not sure. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
