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

[Sheng Jiang <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Ted,

I agree with you that an autonomic network must be able to support incremental grow. So the network topology would not always remain hierarchical. Therefore, hierarchical delegation does not work in an autonomous network. Also, it is difficult to remain routing aggregation based on hierarchical topology in an autonomous network.

But getting back to where we start the discussion, I still think in a large network, the requesting prefix may not always be /64. It is reasonable to have multiple distributed sources for prefix assignment, in a large network. Autonomic network use case also includes to manage the prefix resource among these prefix pools. Some resource may be transferred from one pool to another with negotiation supporting. In such scenario, the requesting device may not know the requesting prefix length, unless it has already negotiated with a certain requested device.

My guess is we should separate the abovementioned scenario from normal /64 prefix assignment. Also Brian's scenario that a devices may require multiple /64 is also common.

Best regards,

Sheng
________________________________________
From: Ted Lemon [[e-mail]]
Sent: 31 October 2014 23:47
To: Sheng Jiang
Cc: Benoit Claise; [e-mail]; Markus Stenberg; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [homenet] [Anima] ANIMA scope + homenet interaction + charter v15

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.   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.