Thanks Markus for clarifying this. In addition, I can also confirm that in the absence of an uplink delegated prefix, a ULA prefix is there to allow internal communications.
So my best guess is that there is a bug around OpenWrt telling hnetd that an interface is up or not, and internal or external. - Pierre > Le 8 nov. 2018 à 20:28, Markus Stenberg <markus.stenb...@iki.fi> a écrit : > > On 08.11.2018, at 19.16, Juliusz Chroboczek <j...@irif.fr> wrote: >>>> From a user perspective, there are a few problems: >>> When an interface goes down and then up again, it's renumbered. This >>> includes reboots. >> That shouldn't happen as long as there remains at least one Homenet router >> to maintain the prefix (see Section 4.1 point 3 of RFC 7695). >> >> I believe that hnetd (but not shncpd) additionally supports some mechanism >> to handle the case where there are no routers left to maintain the prefix, >> but I'm less sure. > > In hnetd there are actually two mechanisms fo ensure prefixes come up back > the same they were before; > > - storage of assigned prefixes (if enabled; if use of flash writes is not > desired this is not used obviously), and > > - ~determinstic pseudo-random assignment on interfaces > > If both fail, that's probably a bug, although not sure if both options can be > off if configured so. Fallback is purely random assignment out of prefix. > > Anyway, getting back to topic of Ted's passionate speech about bad HNCP > implementations, I'd love to see him (or someone else) provide better one :-) > > Cheers, > > -Markus > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
