On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Steven Barth <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 30.11.2015 13:24, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> You still have to sync all information between all HNCP speakers anyway >> in order to facilitate fast handover, both for /128 and /64 solution. > > That's not correct. If you read the draft, in the /128 case there is no > need for this information to be published using HNCP. You would only > publish which routers take part in the roaming.
I generally speak as someone that has been deploying 128s for about 7? years now. However, my hosts participate in the roaming via babel. I realize that a long held homenet mantra is "no hosts changes", but it isn't mine. We can do a lot if we improve the endpoints. > Now, while I mostly agree that the /64 would make certain things easier, > it is not really a feasible solution unless we can ensure, that all ISPs > delegate _at least_ a /56. > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
