On Mar 2, 2019, at 11:30 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]> wrote: > No, they're not. > > Both HNCP and Babel carry their control traffic over link-local IPv6, but > they support both IPv4 and IPv6 with almost equal functionality.
This is one of the reasons that I would like us to get together and hack on this at the hackathon: in fact while what you are saying is technically true, in practice IPv4 _is_ treated like a second-class citizen in the sense that if your ISP-provided public IP address ever goes away, all of your RFC1918 addresses on the homenet also go away. So on a practical level, homenets as currently specified really are, if not v6-only, then at least only-v6-reliable. I think it would actually be better if homenets were IPv6-only, with NAT64 at the edge for the case where there is only an IPv4 address, but I imagine that this would not be a popular enough view to get consensus. It would be equally good if IPv4 were just assumed to be required to work regardless of whether there’s an upstream IPv4 address. This is something that we should really re-think—the way it is now isn’t ideal.
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
