Hi Erik,
My opinion is that OSPF auto-configuration is a separate draft from using OSPF
for prefix assignment within the routing domain. The zOSPF draft would not be
used as is - the work from 2002 would be acknowledged but we'd start with a
clean slate.
In answer to your other question, I don't there are any implementations of OSPF
or ISIS that support auto-configuration today since there has, heretofore, not
been a strong requirement.
Thanks,
Acee
________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Erik
Nordmark [[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 6:08 PM
To: Ole Troan
Cc: [email protected]; Lorenzo Colitti
Subject: Re: [homenet] Homenet strawman slides
On 10/7/11 2:18 PM, Ole Troan wrote:
>>> I think it's
>>> reasonable to write to stable storage whenever you configure a new
>>> prefix or change an existing prefix (but not if you simply refresh it).
>>> If the router comes back up and nobody has the prefix, it would simply
>>> claim it back. If someone else has it, it would have to just form a new
>>> one using loop detection.
>>
>> In your view, if there is a single prefix assigned to the home by the ISP,
>> and there are three routers connected to a particular link in the home,
>> would each of those three routers assign a different prefix to the link?
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>
> see the zospf draft. the DR of the link will assign the prefix for the link.
> the BDR should also store that chosen prefix into stable storage. of course
> if you power off both the DR and the BDR and power up a new 3rd router, the
> link will get a new prefix.
The zospf draft (see section 3.6) declares a conflict if two routers
attached to the same link pick the same IP subnet prefix for that link.
That doesn't seem what we want.
And zospf doesn't talk about using stable storage; doesn't seem to have
any notion of providing stable prefixes assigned to the links.
Thus this problem remains to be solved AFAICT.
I think we first need to agree on what we think are the requirements on
prefix stability. What if one of the routers attached to the link fails
and is replaced by a different router?
What if a link partitions? And later merges?
What the user intentionally splits (partitions) a link (e.g., to create
a separate link for the teenage game room); should the network
automatically pick a new prefix for that new link? (How does that
interact with the prefix being in stable storage on the router.)
One thing to keep in mind as we think about these requirements is that
if the user has created a bridged Ethernet with no routers, all of the
above will work naturally; might take seconds to relearn when the
topology changes but there is no manual intervention needed.
Is that the goal for this prefix assignment?
Who is working on the requirements document? ;-)
Erik
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
