Christof Schulze <> writes:

> There are approaches to reduce the amount of routes per client 
> including using nat66 on each node. You certainly are making it sound 
> like there should be put some thought into reducing the amount of 
> routes. This will be the next step after we have more than just a few 
> nodes / clients inside the same network.

My thinking on this is that you only need the host routes when a client
actually roams.

I.e., you assign a /64 to each node that clients can connect to, and
announce that /64 to the whole network. As long as clients stay
connected to the same node, no additional routing is required.

Once a client roams to a different node, you install host routes (/128s)
on the new node to redirect the traffic. This way you only need host
nodes for clients that roam, which should be fewer than the total number
of clients.

Now, this of course requires clients to be well-behaved, which is where
I think this could break down. I.e., the assumption is that the client
will get an address from the RA on the first node, then keep that active
while it is using it, and drop it and switch to the different prefix on
another node. I *think* this is more or less what Linux does, but I'm
not sure if it'll keep an address around even after there are no more
RAs received for it if it is being used (active connections); if it
doesn't, existing connections will obviously break...


Babel-users mailing list

Reply via email to