On Feb 25, 2013, at 11:21 AM, james woodyatt <[email protected]> wrote:

> Basically, we've given up on stateless router autoconfiguration in HOMENET, 
> and we're forced into a stateful solution.  There are no good choices here, 
> and the worst case outcome is that we will force the widespread adoption of 
> NAT66 at HOMNET borders, precisely because it may turn out that subscribers 
> want stable subnet identifiers, and more of them than their service providers 
> are willing to provide at reasonable price.  This all happened before, and 
> we're not showing any signs of making sure it doesn't happen again.

Here I'm a little confused. Who is "we"? To my knowledge, homenet hasn't given 
up on automated subnet allocation. If homenet has, no problem, let the draft 
expire.

If the ISP wants to allocate specific /64s to a customer, that's actually OK. 
It requires some thought, however. We are going to have to send a DHCP-PD 
request from each router in the network to the ISP's DHCP-PD server, which will 
allocate some number of /64s to the requesting router. I don't know about your 
world; in my world, it's not unusual for routers to have more than two 
interfaces; in a home using wireless and wifi, one could imagine each router 
asking for two downstream subnets just for that in addition to an upstream 
interface. The router in my home, a Cisco 881W, could conceivably have five 
subnets on as many interfaces in addition to whatever is on the ISP-facing 
interface.

I could imagine this requiring some jiggling of the DHCP-PD spec. As I recall, 
it (RFC 3633 section 10) allocates a prefix with a length, and allocates from 
that prefix to a variety of its own interfaces and potentially others. A router 
asking for 5 /64s will in fact ask for, and receive, one /61. If we want it to 
literally ask for a list of /64s, I think we have to play with it a bit. I 
suppose the IA_PD could contain multiple of those options; maybe that's the 
work-around.

What would actually be topical and helpful would be specific comments on the 
draft in question. What that it says do you object to, and what do you wish it 
would say?
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to