RE: [Autoconf] Configuring 'default' in Multi-Subnet MANETs

Fred/All:
I know this question was addressed at Dave, but for at least proactive
routing issues should addressed with some relationship to architecture.
e.g., stub areas, totally stub areas, NSSA type, transit. So I think you
have to first say what is the deployment scenario. 

For stub or totally stub the border router(s) should proactively inject a
default route.  This is normal operation for things like MANET-OSPF and OLSR
types of deployments.  Other cases are more complex. Are there reasons why
this should be different than normal intra-domain types of approaches?  I
see draft-thaler-autoconf-multisubnet-manets as a valid subcase of what we
can do. Is there some motivation why there is a difference here in default
route injection approach?  I guess I am thinking in terms of typical OSPF
default route handling/deployment use cases.

Did you have something in mind or just curious? I think it's a good
question, but I would like to see this discussion be more generally
addressed and am presently hoping we could follow standard best practices
where it makes sense.  I'd  also like to hear if someone has a reason why we
should do something different.

-Joe

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Templin, Fred L [mailto:Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com] 
>Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2006 7:59 PM
>To: autoconf@ietf.org
>Cc: dthaler@microsoft.com
>Subject: [Autoconf] Configuring 'default' in Multi-Subnet MANETs
>
>Dave,
>
>I notice that 'draft-thaler-autoconf-multisubnet-manets'
>is silent on the subject of how MANET routers can configure 
>and use a default route. Do you have any thoughts on this?
>
>Fred
>fred.l.templin@boeing.com 
>
>_______________________________________________
>Autoconf mailing list
>Autoconf@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
Autoconf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf