Re: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)

Teco Boot <teco@inf-net.nl> Thu, 22 July 2010 18:05 UTC

Return-Path: <teco@inf-net.nl>
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 6E5743A6850 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:05:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 RNsIm42MeGQQ for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ew0-f44.google.com (mail-ew0-f44.google.com [209.85.215.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B610C3A6878 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ewy22 with SMTP id 22so3383965ewy.31 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.213.3.70 with SMTP id 6mr421412ebm.51.1279821931037; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.180] (ip56530916.direct-adsl.nl [86.83.9.22]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v59sm55678266eeh.10.2010.07.22.11.05.30 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 22 Jul 2010 11:05:30 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Teco Boot <teco@inf-net.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4C485F49.60606@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:05:29 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E2A2909E-5BFF-4FFF-A520-1DF312F3BBF9@inf-net.nl>
References: <4C2A6BB7.1000900@piuha.net> <4C2CFADD.3040909@piuha.net> <4C378C29.2040302@oracle.com> <323812CA-4C8B-4469-AA6C-0D65191F2735@sensinode.com> <CA71B05E-5CE0-45ED-8292-398136640025@gmail.com> <AANLkTikS7QyebdP6jOXDIM-cm2vE87VgSWFAq6d6PL0v@mail.gmail.com> <4C46EFC8.6020501@piuha.net> <4C48144D.4040105@gmail.com> <E88A7B1C-7E79-4F0D-9E70-098D649953AB@thomasclausen.org> <4C4815B4.6020907@gmail.com> <2310E7B5-FB7C-4EAE-9640-E2A6957CCF7D@thomasclausen.org> <4C482D52.4010306@gmail.com> <4C485F49.60606@gmail.com>
To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081)
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] RFC 5889 (Was: Call for comments to a new AUTOCONF charter proposal)
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: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 18:05:16 -0000

Op 22 jul 2010, om 17:10 heeft Alexandru Petrescu het volgende geschreven:

>> There is a draft and I would like to present it during the next WG
>> meeting - that could show that I do capture that we talk about
>> multi-hop networks.
> 
> I have been asked privately about the draft in question - here it is:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-petrescu-autoconf-ra-based-routing-00
> 
>   "Router Advertisements for Routing between Moving Networks"
> 
> I believe it adapted to AUTOCONF WG discussion as well, but not sure
> whether Chairs accept that I present it.
> 
> I am scheduled to present it in MEXT WG too, Monday, 16h15
> http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/78/agenda/mext.txt

Isn't this draft about routing?
So I doubt on relation with Autoconf.

If it described an interesting addressing model for MANETs, I support a small slot for a presentation.
But after a quick look, I didn't see such.

I'm opposed to single prefix sharing on multiple mobile networks (the 2001:00xx/24 example).
I guess it is a flaw. 

Teco