Re: [Autoconf] new charter

"Teco Boot" <teco@inf-net.nl> Thu, 26 February 2009 19:04 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 3EE4F3A6AC3 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:04:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.663
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.383, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553]
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 oW7Qr6nW7Eql for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:04:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cpsmtpo-eml01.kpnxchange.com (cpsmtpo-eml01.KPNXCHANGE.COM [213.75.38.150]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 342DB3A6907 for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:04:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cpsmtp-eml103.kpnxchange.com ([213.75.84.103]) by cpsmtpo-eml01.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:04:58 +0100
Received: from M90Teco ([86.83.9.22]) by cpsmtp-eml103.kpnxchange.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:04:57 +0100
From: "Teco Boot" <teco@inf-net.nl>
To: "'Alexandru Petrescu'" <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>, "'Ryuji Wakikawa'" <ryuji.wakikawa@gmail.com>
References: <499F0BA7.90501@piuha.net> <7E8A76F7-2CE0-463A-8EE8-8877C46B4715@gmail.com> <49A6D436.7020505@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49A6D436.7020505@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 20:04:57 +0100
Message-ID: <000001c99845$1dc56190$595024b0$@nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AcmYOXIB1YmiHDQaTMKZ3bLe+WwlMQACilZQ
Content-Language: nl
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Feb 2009 19:04:57.0777 (UTC) FILETIME=[1DDA2210:01C99845]
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: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:04:42 -0000

Inline:

|-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
|Van: autoconf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:autoconf-bounces@ietf.org] Namens
|Alexandru Petrescu
|Verzonden: donderdag 26 februari 2009 18:41
|Aan: Ryuji Wakikawa
|CC: autoconf@ietf.org
|Onderwerp: Re: [Autoconf] new charter
|
|Ryuji Wakikawa a écrit :
|[gracefully re-formatted]
|> Ad-Hoc Network Autoconfiguration (autoconf)
|>
|> Last Modified: 2009-02-18
|>
|> Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/autoconf
|[snipped]
|> Description of Working Group:
|>
|> In order to communicate among themselves, ad hoc nodes (refer to RFC
|> 2501) need to configure their network interface(s) with local
|addresses
|> that are valid within an ad hoc network. Ad hoc nodes may also need to
|> configure globally routable addresses, in order to communicate with
|> devices on the Internet. From the IP layer perspective, an ad hoc
|> network presents itself as a L3 multi-hop network formed over a
|> collection of links.
|>
|> The main purpose of the AUTOCONF WG is to describe the addressing
|model
|> for ad hoc networks and how nodes in these networks configure their
|> addresses. It is required that such models do not cause problems for
|ad
|> hoc-unaware parts of the system, such as standard applications running
|> on an ad hoc node or regular Internet nodes attached to the ad hoc
|> nodes. This group's effort may include the development of new protocol
|> mechanisms, should the existing IP autoconfiguration mechanisms be
|found
|> inadequate. However, the first task of the working group is to
|describe
|> one practical addressing model for ad hoc networks.
|
|Would a straightforward addressing model along the following lines fit
|the bill?:
|
|         -----  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::1/64 and 2001:db8::4/64.
|                 Manually assigned, or pre-configured with SNMP
|                 or according to stateless autoconf rfc4862.

I do not understand why the router doesn't advertize prefixes. If so, the
hosts can autoconfigure globally unique addresses, with distinct prefixes.
If not, and one configures globally unique addresses with same prefix on
different segments, (s)he is fully responsible for what services are and are
not provided. I would never design such a network.
So I would say: no.

My 2ct, Teco



|Alex
|
|
|_______________________________________________
|Autoconf mailing list
|Autoconf@ietf.org
|https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf