>> What does flow-through PD mean? Do you have any reference on that? > > It means that the edge router has the delegation, and then sub-delegates > individual /64s from the pool of /64s it was delegated by the ISP, rather > than splitting its delegation and delegating chunks of that delegation to > downstream routers which will then delegate in turn. In order for this to > work, downstream routers have to relay PD requests to the edge router, and > install routes to the delegated prefixes. Something analogous could work on > an autonomous network; I don't know that it's the right way to solve the > problem, but it's certainly one way to solve the problem. Homenet went with > HNCP because it's more sensitive to arbitrary topology changes. > > The hierarchical model doesn't work because it doesn't anticipate new routers > being added to the network, and doesn't account for unbalanced topologies. > I thought the hipnet proposal wound up going with the flow-through model, not > the hierarchical model, but I may be mistaken.
I think the homenet wg did a good of analysing the 3 variants proposed. the "flow-through" model as far as I can recall suffers from DHCP's general problem of dealing with multiple sources of information (think multihoming with separate CE routers), in addition you either need to build what's essentially a spanning tree of DHCP relays or you need some mechanism to discover the set of DHCP server(s). certainly do-able, but not quite out of the box. cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
