On Fri, 18 Sep 2015, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
- Transport: both L2 & IPv6 (Link-Local)
Which is suggested for Homenet? The two don't interoperate, right?
Well, there is nothing that stops a device to form P2P neighbors over both
ways, but since the feedback historically has been that L2 is hard in some
devices (the protocol stack implementation is pretty much geared towards
IPv4/IPv6), I'd suggest IPv6 LL for homenet.
- Point-to-Multi-Point or Broadcast over L2 or IPv6
Which is suggested for Homenet? Or do the two interoperate?
Historically you configure an interface as either LAN (default for
ethernet) or P2P (default for point to point interfaces). My suggestion
would be to use P2MP everywhere for simplicity, but I would really prefer
to use LAN for wired ports, but since LAN ports can be bridged over all
kinds of physical media, I guess P2MP is the safest way to go for
everything to make sure we're not using multicast apart for discovery.
These are standard IS-IS wide metrics, although it makes use of the per
neighbor metrics available with draft-lamparter-isis-p2mp.
Does this interoperate with standard IS-IS?
No, the draft explicitly states that P2MP is a new hello type and that
P2MP routers must discard LAN and P2P Hello PDUs.
To address this, links without metric information (i.e. direct links
between clients) will not be considered for SPF. Since 802.11 frames
from clients to clients are relayed by the AP, this actually can reflect
the metrics better.
Are you assuming that there are no dumb layer 2 APs in the network?
Yes, that is a tradeoff. If there are L2 APs then insight into the wifi
layer is lost.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: [email protected]
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
