Mikael, >>> In my mind, I was looking at a new mechanism that the ISP routers used to >>> tell each other what prefix they were advertising and handing out. >> >> the kind of do with >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment-03 >> >> but you can't a) expect the ISP routers to be able to discover each other >> (might not be on the same link), b) operated by the same entity. > > b) I never imagined, a) would be nice if that could be solved. I don't see > any text in that draft regarding source based routing though.
correct, we haven't described that anywhere I think. >>> I couldn't find specifics on "DHCP option for SAS/DAS policy", so I don't >>> know what that means exactly. Could you give a pointer? If I read >>> <https://github.com/otroan/IETF-CPE-router/wiki> my guess is that it is >>> more for the homenet router when they get DHCPv6-PD, but I might be >>> mistaken? >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6man-addr-select-opt/ >> this is more for multi-homing to non-congruent networks. >> >>> But relying on RFC6724 rule 5.5 for all hosts seems unfeasable. I'd rather >>> solve getting the correct traffic to the correct ISP router on the ISP >>> router level, not in the hosts. So no ICMP redirects, just source based >>> routing between the ISP routers. >> >> we're not, the RFC6724 rule only applies when a host is connected to two >> routers with different upstream connectivity. >> inside the home, i.e the host is behind two internal home routers, SADR is >> used to get to the correct border. > > What happens if the host doesn't support 5.5? one of the other things in my list happens. ICMP type 1,code 5 ICMP redirect blackhole . . > >> the only thing we're asking for here is that the hosts also do a simplified >> form for SADR when directly connected to multiple border routers. > > So, I still can't find anything about a mechanism for routers in homenet for > network-wide discovery of where a certain src address packet should be sent > when it's destined for the default route (to the Internet). > > Why can't OSPF be used (needs new functionality) so that all homenet routers > learn a default-route per prefix, and thus have multiple default routes, and > select which one to use depending on what the src address is of the packet? > That would relieve the hosts of having to do anything at all (it is nice if > they can do 5.5, but things wouldn't break without it). Basically > "multi-topology" but instead of being one for IPv4 and one for IPv6, we now > have one topology per ISP allocated prefix. > > Or am I missing things again? no, this is pretty much what we imagined, and what Markus has implemented and showed at the IETF. the hosts would still do better if they support rule 5.5 when directly connected to the exits. cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
