Re: [Anima] ANIMA scope + homenet interaction + charter v15

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 31/10/2014 16:47, Ted Lemon a écrit :
> On Oct 31, 2014, at 10:55 AM, Sheng Jiang <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>> The current general mechanism are too general to work for the use
>> case of hierarchical prefix delegation. But if we add hierarchical
>> topology and no bypass requests as constraint conditions, we may be
>> able to make hierarchical prefix delegation work.
>
> No, that is not the point I am making.   The point I am making is
> that hierarchical delegation simply won't work, no matter what
> mechanism you put in place to do it, because the network has to be
> able to grow incrementally.   With that as a base assumption, you
> cannot predict where the network will grow, so you don't know how to
> construct the hierarchy.   Once the hierarchy is constructed, you
> would have to renumber on a regular basis to make hierarchical
> delegation work.

At which point one wonders whether Router Renumbering RFC2894 may need 
some updates.

Alex


    I think it is preferable to simply allow for a
> complete routing table, and then try as best as possible to make
> routing hierarchical, without demanding perfection.
>
> _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>
>