On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 04:17:06AM +0000, Brzozowski, John wrote: > David Lamparter wrote: > >On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40:25PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > >> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Michael Richardson > >> <[email protected]>wrote: > >> > >> > Would/could another foot of such a network be on the IETF network? > >> > > >> > >> If the IETF network didn't respond to DHCPv6 PD requests, it wouldn't be > >> much use. > > > >Even without DHCPv6 PD on the remainder of the IETF network, it might be > >possible to get a /52../56 and run a DHCPv6 PD ourselves, emulating part > >of the provider network. > > Why emulate it? Is the intention here to test the the code on an > enterprise or corporate network?
The scope of the plugfest is the interior and border of the homenet. To get the border right, we need the service provider side of that border in some form. If the IETF network runs DHCPv6-PD, that is an usable approximation. My suggestion was for the case that the IETF network won't be running DHCPv6-PD. In that case, the easiest way to make the IETF network usable as one uplink for the homenet plugfest is to ask for a /52 to be made available for the plugfest in some static way and then provide DHCPv6-PD from that, running on some random PC box/laptop somewhere. Actually - controlling the DHCPv6-PD might be advantageous in order to allow tinkering with it to see how the testbed reacts. -David _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
