In reviewing this enormous thread it appears to have got off-track
again, discussing esoterica of various routing protocols and not focused
on the big picture.

There's been too many comments for me to comment individually on the
messages.

However, overall trends on this list are discouraging.

1) Getting IPv6 working well inside the home is a hard problem! It helps
to actually try to make something work, to see the relevant details. I'd
like it very much if at an upcomin

I've built 3 such networks, and am in the process of building several
more - as well as making available code on a cheap, 120 dollar, platform
to make it possible to actually go and set one up yourself to play with,
so the more devilish, detailed problems become apparent. I've done my
best to make sure 6to4, at least, works right out of the box. Native (no
PD yet!) works pretty well, too - but getting the 6to4/ipv6 native to
co-exist better is going to take slightly more work.

http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/OCEAN_CITY_INSTALLATION_GUIDE

There's babel, batman, rip, radvd, ospf, ospfv6, is-is, and bgp all
available. Go play.

I'd like it very much if at an upcoming meeting or event someone or
someones were to demonstrate working code...

2) Now, in reviewing this thread, I was disappointed to see that my ipv6
routing protocol of choice (babel) has not been discussed so far to any
extent. While this protocol is somewhat new, an rfc and working code
both exist, and working code has existed for several years.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6126
http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~jch/software/babel/

Of late there has been a great deal of work on creating a metric that
does diversity routing - accounting for the differences in performance
between contested wireless channels and ethernet to some extent.

It seems to me that that babel has got lumped in a mental catagory of
'mesh networking protocol' - which it is - but it is better described as
'rip on speed' as it works across normal wired, wireless, AND mesh
networks - something no other routing protocol does well (IMHO!). Things
like 802.11s are targetted at wireless only.

The future inside the home is mostly wireless, not wired... and as many
of the assumptions built into ipv6, dhcp, dhcpv6, ra announcements, etc
completely predate the rise of wireless everywhere, they tend to be,
well... wrong.

Here are the current routing tables from bloatlab #1

http://www.bufferbloat.net/projects/cerowrt/wiki/BloatLab_1

http://www.teklibre.com/~d/labroutes/

I am using CIDR networks (/27 netmasks) on the ipv4 side to reduce the
broadcast/multicast problem that wireless-n has, and a variety of IP
address distribution mechanisms on the ipv6 side - autoconfig/ra and ahcp.

Some notes:

0) It took me multiple years of fiddling with the ipv6 routing protocols
available to settle on babel. Babel is definitely not finished or
perfect, but thankfully it has a pluggable metric.

1) Babel treats IPv6 as a first class object - ipv4 and ipv6 routes are
distributed in the same message - and within the same daemon and
configuration files. I had used olsr in an earlier attempt at convincing
ipv6 to work well on a previously pure ipv4 - the size of the 2 daemons
required, the doubling of packets sent, and the complexity of the conf
files all deterred me.

2) Setup is devestatingly simple compared to any other routing protocol
I've tried. For example, it uses a EUI-64 equivalent as a router-id, no
setup required.

Now I actually use, in the home, a setup that dumps dhcp, dhcpv6, and ra
entirely, replacing them with a combination of AHCP and babel - AHCP
also distributes ipv4 and ipv6 in the same message, and also (when done
right) gives the ability to transparently move between wired and
multiple wireless links without dropping connections. Stepping back into
what others think as the real world... in the office -  is often a shock
- I unplug and... "oh damn, I just lost 20+ windows and the movie I was
streaming..." where that *doesn't happen* when using the above two
protocols at home....

AHCP uses /128 netmasks which makes subnetting a single ipv6/64
allocation a breeze.

I can think of a few more compelling advantages for considering new
ideas such as these protocols inside the home, but this is almost enough
for today.

I'll talk to the more generic problems with prefix based routing in a
mixed 6to4 and native scenario, the dns naming problem, and the ip
address expiry problem some other day...

but you can see those for yourself with a little investment of time and
hardware in trying to actually make something - anything! - actually work.


-- 
Dave Täht

<<attachment: dave_taht.vcf>>

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to