JJB, I'm reading that draft link you just sent out in response to IGP avoidance in multi-router HNs. I for one would like to avoid icky/sticky RIP'y or a heavier IGP if we can at all avoid it. -KE
________________________________ From: John Jason Brzozowski [mailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com] Sent: Thu 7/30/2009 9:20 AM To: Mikael Abrahamsson; IETF IPv6 Mailing List Cc: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-rou...@tools.ietf.org; draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-r...@tools.ietf.org Subject: Re: Comments on IPv6 Prefix Subdelegation > From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swm...@swm.pp.se> > Organization: People's Front Against WWW > Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:21:50 -0400 > To: IETF IPv6 Mailing List <ipv6@ietf.org> > Cc: <draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-rou...@tools.ietf.org>, > <draft-donley-ipv6-cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-r...@tools.ietf.org> > Subject: Re: Comments on IPv6 Prefix Subdelegation > > On Thu, 30 Jul 2009, Fred Baker wrote: > >> Um, what does a router do? Look at the example in the text and ask >> yourself if you want an average user (my canonical "average user" being >> my daughter, who wanted me to come to her house to install a camera on >> her computer so she could use it on Skype - "did you try plugging it >> in?") manually installing routes in each of the four routers when they >> could in fact learn them from each other directly? > > So, looking at this from another angle, namely deployment. I'm a router > engineer, I support the use of routing protocols as much as the next > router engineer, but I think a good question to ask is whether most home > CPE vendors think RIP for IPv6 is hard to implement, or if this is > something they consider easy? [jjmb] implementation difficulty is important as is making sure the underlying hardware can support it. Also we may be ok with a routing protocol but what about someone who is not a router engineer? Will it be straightforward enough for everyone else to setup? > > If it's easy to implement RIP for IPv6 then I'm a proponent for that > model. > > Fred, (just checking) the model you're advocating then is that DHCPv6-PD > from the main home CPE (with WAN connection) hands out subnets which are > then announced to all home gateways via RIP(v6) ? > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swm...@swm.pp.se > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
