Ted, >> 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. > > Actually it doesn't suffer from this problem. You just wind up getting a > prefix delegation per edge router, and when you get a delegation, you add > that edge router to the list of routers to which you will relay downstream > prefix delegation requests. You do not need spanning tree because if you > reach the same router through two different paths, you will just get the same > delegation twice per DUID/IAID. > > The reason homenet didn't go with this solution is essentially that HNCP has > a better feature set and is easier to make work in a homenet environment. > > (To be clear, I am just explaining the prefix delegation model. If Anima > doesn't want to do it that way, that's fine with me, just as it's fine with > me that homenet went with HNCP.) >
it isn't as obvious as you make it out to be. there is no point in us arguing over that here (we have had this exact argument previously), write a draft if you think the flow-through model is viable in a network with multiple edges and arbitrary topology. cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
