Ted, >> The mic line was too long to bring this up: >> You suggest using RFC 3633. How about RFC 2894 (Router renumbering) too? >> Typo: the draft actually cites RFC 3363, which is not what you intended... > > Ditto on the mic line—very frustrating. I think you overestimate the > obstacles to using DHCPv6 PD for this application. I don't think any > protocol extension is required. What is needed is ad-hoc relay > configuration, which is already anticipated. The CPE device can just > allocate a /64 for any PD it receives, and with ad-hoc relaying, it should > all Just Work. > > The way ad hoc relaying works is that when you come up, your PD client asks > for a prefix on its upstream port. If it receives PDs, it relays them on > its upstream port. These PDs all wind up at the CPE device, which allocates > /64s to them and forwards them back, all in accordance with the existing DHCP > relay mechanism. > > I think homenet would have to do a draft describing how to set this up, but > it does not require a DHCP extension. There'd be some details to document > on how the routing topology gets set up; perhaps that could be done with OSPF.
- how do you discovery the DHCP server? do you require a hard-wired upstream port for this to work? - what do you do with two routers on the same link, two separate prefixes? (or smart DHCP server (e.g. having the SPF)) - what do you with multiple sources of information? change the DHCP protocol so that a client picks _all_ servers, instead of the _best_ one? cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
