One more thing, I call this "scalable de-aggregation". It is a refinement of
what
first appeared in RFC6179.
Thanks - Fred
fred.l.temp...@boeing.com
> -Original Message-
> From: ipv6-ops-bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de
> [mailto:ipv6-ops-
> bounces+fred.l.templin=boei
Hi Nick,
More on this, please see Section 3.7 on the AERO Routing System (2 pages). It
tells
how the DHCPv6 relay can inject delegated prefixes into the routing system
without
imparting unacceptable churn and while allowing scaling to many millions of
delegated
prefixes. There is a terminology
Nick,
>> It shouldn't be the IETF's job to tell people how to run their networks.
>> The IETF provides the building blocks.
>
> Take a DHCP server, an ISP access router and a CPE.
>
> The CPE connects to the ISP access router and issues a dhcp request.
> This is relayed by the access device to t
Hi Nick,
> -Original Message-
> From: ipv6-ops-bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de
> [mailto:ipv6-ops-
> bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard
> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 2:13 PM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: ipv6-ops@lists.cluen
Templin, Fred L wrote:
> Folks, for real – read AERO. It works. I apologize if that offends anyone.
Not at all. It's just that I'm confused about why we would need to
resort to a tunneling protocol in order to make basic ipv6 functionality
work.
Would it not be better to try to make ipv6 work wi
Folks, for real – read AERO. It works. I apologize if that offends anyone.
Fred
Wait, Wait!
So your telling me that it's wrong for DHCPv6 servers to feed default
gateways to endpoints because "who better than the router to know whom to
route too" but for DHCPv6-PD we should rely on the DHCPv6 servers to do
route injection?
This is classic! just classic!
Take this back to t
>>> So basically, regarding how to actually implement PD in a network (from an
>>> IETF point of view), everybody just gave up, declared the problem
>>> unsolvable, and went back to sleep?
>>
>> It shouldn't be the IETF's job to tell people how to run their networks.
>> The IETF provides the bui
Ole Troan wrote:
> It shouldn't be the IETF's job to tell people how to run their networks.
> The IETF provides the building blocks.
Take a DHCP server, an ISP access router and a CPE.
The CPE connects to the ISP access router and issues a dhcp request.
This is relayed by the access device to the
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Ole Troan wrote:
So basically, regarding how to actually implement PD in a network (from
an IETF point of view), everybody just gave up, declared the problem
unsolvable, and went back to sleep?
It shouldn't be the IETF's job to tell people how to run their networks.
The IE
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: ipv6-ops-bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de
> [mailto:ipv6-ops-
> bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de] On Behalf Of Erik Kline
> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 11:37 AM
> To: Ole Troan
> Cc: IPv6 Ops list ; Mikael Abrahamsso
Mikael,
>> We also tried (and failed) to come up with a secure mechanism for the
>> requesting router to advertise it's delegated prefix to first-hop routers.
>>
>> Less astonished? ;-)
>
> Well, I guess I shouldn't be astonished. I've even seen vendors implement the
> DHCPv6-PD server on the
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: ipv6-ops-bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de
> [mailto:ipv6-ops-
> bounces+fred.l.templin=boeing@lists.cluenet.de] On Behalf Of Gert Doering
> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 4:37 AM
> To: Ole Troan
> Cc: ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de; Mikae
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Ole Troan wrote:
We also tried (and failed) to come up with a secure mechanism for the
requesting router to advertise it's delegated prefix to first-hop
routers.
Less astonished? ;-)
Well, I guess I shouldn't be astonished. I've even seen vendors implement
the DHCPv6-PD
Hi,
On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 12:39:03PM +0200, Ole Troan wrote:
> > I've talked to several people who claim there are lots of equipment out
> > there which will happily do DHCPv6 relaying of PD messages, but then not
> > install a route for the corresponding delegation.
>
> That's perfectly fine
Mikael,
>>> I've talked to several people who claim there are lots of equipment out
>>> there which will happily do DHCPv6 relaying of PD messages, but then not
>>> install a route for the corresponding delegation.
>>
>> That's perfectly fine behaviour by the way.
>> DHCPv6 PD snooping is just
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, Ole Troan wrote:
I've talked to several people who claim there are lots of equipment out there
which will happily do DHCPv6 relaying of PD messages, but then not install a
route for the corresponding delegation.
That's perfectly fine behaviour by the way.
DHCPv6 PD snoopi
> I've talked to several people who claim there are lots of equipment out there
> which will happily do DHCPv6 relaying of PD messages, but then not install a
> route for the corresponding delegation.
That's perfectly fine behaviour by the way.
DHCPv6 PD snooping is just one way of doing route i
18 matches
Mail list logo
