Re: [Autoconf] new charter

HyungJin Lim <dream.hjlim@gmail.com> Fri, 27 February 2009 10:45 UTC

Return-Path: <dream.hjlim@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: autoconf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CED33A6C33 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:45:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JunkpWsmbfoS for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:45:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com (ti-out-0910.google.com [209.85.142.188]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A43EE3A6803 for <Autoconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:45:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 11so1301363tim.25 for <Autoconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:46:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=/EAKj40Ohwbx7DonC31i3uLNuNZD4tieicrM9NGKzRU=; b=lukTj5CoiqnJsLuJXa2XPMsW1RnFMpmgmwQRpwtAnMmCCAagYONsNTuAq0mGOw8nRQ KuS3CIeiKWaKhKR7MUPW9cPoZnRgkZlHc91ijOT+cECgkmBezRM1LY/saCKPB4IHtE2L wVP6awIfGFiQlknQiD3kWot2vDRkkKvQjBBbI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=KkhnBHdpvFptESW8S2vfq3lZHN2ekTGqxDlydpRnEh3zd+b7QY56Wr9OcUR9bnxaCu 7uY5yTWVoJ9yz4+vCI7i8rHcBbBIqWo460FQ+LX6y8Sr0zAOgvgCdPGZpQcNgtYns4uh nnkhkLhfPkLS9AJS756rRLRlqpTIhup8HKmtk=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.110.52.5 with SMTP id z5mr21286tiz.26.1235731575239; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 02:46:15 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <49A7BC80.4000807@gmail.com>
References: <499F0BA7.90501@piuha.net> <7E8A76F7-2CE0-463A-8EE8-8877C46B4715@gmail.com> <49A6D436.7020505@gmail.com> <000001c99845$1dc56190$595024b0$@nl> <49A6F125.40400@gmail.com> <1235680887.4585.5.camel@localhost> <7e8d02d40902261737n1c21b136hd575b8afa8702188@mail.gmail.com> <49A7BC80.4000807@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:46:15 +0900
Message-ID: <7e8d02d40902270246k687c68d2t717e301041f8aa53@mail.gmail.com>
From: HyungJin Lim <dream.hjlim@gmail.com>
To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>, teco@inf-net.nl
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001485f880e49474e00463e42d3e
Cc: Autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] new charter
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration WG discussion list <autoconf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/autoconf>
List-Post: <mailto:autoconf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf>, <mailto:autoconf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:45:56 -0000

Hi Alex,

Long time, no hear...
See inline....


2009/2/27 Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>;

> HyungJin Lim a écrit :
>
>> Hi Carlos,
>>  This is Hyung-Jin, Lim
>> I have a question.
>> See the inline....
>>
>>  2009/2/27 Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es <mailto:
>> cjbc@it.uc3m.es>>;
>>
>>
>>    Hi Alex:
>>
>>           One question below.
>>
>>    El jue, 26-02-2009 a las 20:44 +0100, Alexandru Petrescu escribió:
>>     > Sorry, I made an error indeed putting same prefix.  How about this
>>     > updated picture with the prefixes being distinct:
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >          -----  wifi "adhoc1"  ------  wifi "adhoc2"  -----
>>     >         |Host1|---------------|Router|---------------|Host2|
>>     >          ----- LL1         LL2 ------ LL3        LL4  -----
>>     >                G1                                G4
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >         "adhoc1" and "adhoc2": 802.11 ESSIDs in "ad-hoc" mode.
>>     >                                Each is an IPv6 subnet.
>>     >         LL1...4: IPv6 link-local addresses.
>>     >                  Self-formed according to rfc2464.
>>     >         G1, G4:  IPv6 global addresses, for example
>>     >                  2001:db8:1::1/64 and
>>     >                  2001:db8:2::4/64
>>     >                  Manually assigned, or pre-configured with SNMP
>>     >                  or formed according to stateless autoconf rfc4862;
>>     >                  the prefixes are advertised by Router in RAs.
>>     >
>>
>>    Does this model only apply to Host-Router-Host scenarios? I mean, does
>>    this model apply for Router-Router-Router scenarios? I fully agree the
>>    model fits the first scenario, but I don't for the second, since
>>    routers' mobility within the ad-hoc network would force them to change
>>    prefixes often, I guess. For those scenarios it might be better to
>> think
>>    of addressing models in which MANET routers are configured with /128
>>    (or /32 for IPv4) addresses, so they don't need to change their
>>    addresses as a result of link changes.
>>
>>  Does AUTOCONF not consider "ad-hoc network to Internet" scenario ?
>>
>
> Do you mean something like this?:


Okey!!.

>
>
>   -----  wifi "adhoc1"  ------  wifi "adhoc2"  --------     /
>  |Host1|---------------|Router|---------------|Gatewway|---| Internet
>   ----- LL1         LL2 ------ LL3        LL4  --------     \
>         G1                                G4
>
>
>       "adhoc1" and "adhoc2": 802.11 ESSIDs in "ad-hoc" mode.
>                              Each is an IPv6 subnet.
>       LL1...4: IPv6 link-local addresses.
>                Self-formed according to rfc2464.
>       G1, G4: ?


 Host1 may be a Router I think.
 This router may be mobile router.i.e, NEMO.
In disaster environment, this scenario is possible. Then, gateway will use
satelite channel.
Considering your case, Host1 will get his address from the upper router
(case 1) or the gateway (case 2).
According to which case is configured, this network has other aspects.

anyway,

Already, Teco described satifactory aspects relation to this situation in
previous message.
Do you also agree with his comments ?

Thanks,
Hyung-Jin, Lim


> Alex
>
>