On 30.1.2014, at 13.11, Alexandru Petrescu <[email protected]> wrote: > Le 30/01/2014 12:04, Ole Troan a écrit : >>> In my understanding, there is a need to couple the prefix assignment to the >>> routing protocol. Although I am not sure how much tight, or what tight and >>> loose might mean. >> >> to clarify what I meant: >> tight coupling --- integrated in a routing protocol, e.g. in >> draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment >> loosely coupled --- separate (new) protocol > Could it be separate (existing) protocol?
Given that it fulfills requirements, yes. I’m not aware of one, though. Off the cuff requirements follow: - ~distributed database across network (=every node acts on same information, at least with some delay; some pruning may be possible for some cases, but not much; for simplification I’d say same information everywhere) - precedence mechanism for sorting out conflicts among participating nodes - information about neighbors on local link(s) (and preferably also some precedence function for deciding e.g. who needs to do DHCPv4 server duties if supporting IPv4) Given node == router in this use case, it smells a lot like link state routing protocol to me. Has someone defined one without routing functionality as such? Cheers, -Markus _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
