> We still need to figure out how routing protocol metrics should be done. > > For me, these are configured, indicating to me that HNCP should do it.
I'll add my 0.50Kč (roughly $0.02) against doing that. Right now, the interaction between the routing protocol and the rest of the stack is very simple and very clean: HNCP redistributes assigned prefixes into the RP, and the RP redistributes the default route into the RA server. Redistribution is a well understood, widely implemented mechanism, one that we all feel comfortable with. This is the very reason why David could take shncpd and run it with IS-IS. What you are suggesting requires some form of tighter binding between HNCP and the RP. This raises a number of difficult questions, such as what is the metric space (e.g. RIP uses 4-bit integers, IS-IS uses 8- or 24-bit integers, plain Babel uses 16-bit integers, the Babel-Z extension uses variable-length vectors of 8-bit integers), what mechanism should be used to communicate the metric between HNCP and the RP (is the kernel priority field suitable and what systems implement it?) and how often HNCP should inform the RP of metric fluctuations. I'm pretty sure we don't want to go there. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
