On Wed, 12 Aug 2015, Ole Troan wrote:
Mikael,
Your document describes (in my opinion) desireable behaviour for devices going
forward. I would like to see text for DHCPv6 as well, both IA_NA and IA_PD, if
the same kind of behaviour can work there somehow. This is out of scope for
homenet though.
the rule applies regardless of how the addresses have been assigned.
Yes, but how will the router signal that it'll handle addresses for a certain
prefix, for instance a /56 from where DHCPv6 IA_NA and IA_PD is being assigned,
but that isn't onlink?
Advertising that /56 as an off-link prefix hasn't historically said "I'll handle
Internet traffic for source addresses within all prefixes that I announce, both offlink
and on-link". Perhaps we can say that it does, but it's not obvious to me that there
are no corner cases for this that'll break things.
the rule we are proposing is something like:
“In SA, DA, NH selection, prefer the NH that has advertised a PIO covering the
SA”
Check. And PIO here can be RIO as well?
What about if there are several PIO/RIOs of different size, do we do
longest matching on them to prefer one? Or shortest because the guy with
the shortest prefix (not /0) is more likely to be the one closest to the
uplink?
can you construct an example where the rule breaks things and that not
having the rule wouldn’t?
No, I am still trying to figure out exactly what is being proposed. Next
step is to try to come up with something that'll make things break.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
