> -----Original Message----- > From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of Ole Troan > Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 1:02 PM > To: Brian Haberman > Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; Fred Baker > Subject: Re: Question: Detecting routers on a link > > Brian, > > > It appears from the discussion that the "network > administrator" is trying to get *multiple* Linksys/equivalent > systems to work together with no intervention (and > potentially with multiple, independent ISPs). None of the > people who I know who have such a setup with IPv4 expect this > to work "out of the box" and that is what I see people trying > to do here with ULAs. > > not quite as complicated as that even. two CPEs routers side > by side (presumably connected to different ISPs). if there is > a requirement that a CPE router should automatically generate > a ULA, should the 2 routers then coordinate the ULA > assignment between them.
Is there existing text (or assumptions?) that avoids a similar problem with wired and wireless support on a *single* CE router and a computer (e.g., laptop)? -d > as you say, I'm not aware of any networks like that which you > can auto-configure for IPv4 either. and the benefit of a > single ULA prefix versus two when you in any case don't have > zeroconf routing. > > I'm trying to get an idea what IETF consensus is for these > two BBF requirements. I take your opinion to be: this is not > a problem we should solve (it really requires a lot of other > things too). > > cheers, > Ole > > > > Fred Baker wrote: > >> well, of course. The question isn't what the RFC was > written for, it's what it might be used for. In this case, > the "network administrator" is the person who in today's > internet installs a Linksys/equivalent system in the > residence/SOHO and expects to to work before they have > attached to the ISP. It works with IPv4... > >> On Jan 15, 2010, at 9:43 AM, Brian Haberman wrote: > >>> Wojciech Dec (wdec) wrote: > >>>> In general, reading through the ULA rfc, while there is > a fair bot of > >>>> talk regarding pseudo-random ULA global-id's and use > along with SLAAC, > >>>> there hardly is any reference to the scenario where there can be > >>>> multiple global-id's per site sourced by multiple > routers. However, the > >>>> presence of a subnet-id indicates that the authors did > have in mind a > >>>> more managed addressing assignment regime, which becomes > undone in the > >>>> multiple router/gateway case. > >>> > >>> The ULA RFC was not written with the perspective that > individual routers would automatically generate the ULA > prefix and then advertise them (either in RAs or a routing > protocol). Rather, a network administrator would generate > the ULA prefix using the guidelines provided, design a subnet > model for the network, and then configure the ULA prefix + > subnet information in the routers. > >>> > >>> If a network admin wanted multiple, diverse ULA prefixes, > he/she can use the random generation logic to generate an > arbitrary number of them. Again, the RFC was not written with > the intent of routers automatically generating the ULA prefix > without operator intervention. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Brian > >>> > >>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > >>> ipv6@ietf.org > >>> Administrative Requests: > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > >>> > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > > ipv6@ietf.org > > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPv6 working group mailing list > ipv6@ietf.org > Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
