Re: [Autoconf] new charter

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Fri, 27 February 2009 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@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 6EA703A6882 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 06:58:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.183
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.183 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.066, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
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 bQqxFqCnZrZH for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 06:58:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.166.172.107]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 686503A6452 for <Autoconf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 06:58:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nephilia.intra.cea.fr (nephilia.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.33]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id n1REwjeg018478; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:58:45 +0100
Received: from muguet2.intra.cea.fr (muguet2.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.7]) by nephilia.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1REwiHC004369; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:58:45 +0100 (envelope-from alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.133.173]) by muguet2.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.1) with ESMTP id n1REwi5M004902; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:58:44 +0100
Message-ID: <49A7FFA4.9000101@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:58:44 +0100
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: HyungJin Lim <dream.hjlim@gmail.com>
References: <499F0BA7.90501@piuha.net> <000001c99845$1dc56190$595024b0$@nl> <49A6F125.40400@gmail.com> <1235680887.4585.5.camel@localhost> <7e8d02d40902261737n1c21b136hd575b8afa8702188@mail.gmail.com> <49A7BC80.4000807@gmail.com> <7e8d02d40902270246k687c68d2t717e301041f8aa53@mail.gmail.com> <49A7E7C1.7080300@gmail.com> <7e8d02d40902270604j2536a938je0cb1629627ebbe2@mail.gmail.com> <49A7F84C.7030606@gmail.com> <7e8d02d40902270645n6101f745tfca6d41302afadf8@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7e8d02d40902270645n6101f745tfca6d41302afadf8@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
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 14:58:26 -0000

  ------  wifi "adhoc1"  ------  wifi "adhoc2"  -------- Satelite /
|NEMOMR|---------------|Router|---------------|Gatewway|--------Int'net
  ------ LL1         LL2 ------ LL3        LL4  --------  TCA     \
         G1                                 G4

        LL1...4: IPv6 link-local addresses.
                 Self-formed according to rfc2464.
        G1: address formed by NEMOMR either from RA sent by Router, or
            by DHCPv6 considering Router is a DHCPRelay and Gateway is
            a DHCPServer.
        G4: ?
        TCA: Topologically-Correct Address, for Gateway.  It can be
             manually configured on Gateway, or DHCP, or stateless
             autoconf.

HyungJin Lim a écrit :
>> Why should Router have a TCA?
> 
> 
> Is the Router fixed one ? I think "no".

Right - Router is not fixed: it can move in a circular area of radius
25m. No more than that. Is this sufficient?

> Do you assume this router only has a function for packet routing ?

Mostly yes.

> I don't think so. This router also should be managed from remote 
> location in any case. In realistic MANET environment, exactly, mesh 
> network, this router can have some roles as host I think.

Ok, Router should be contacted from the Internet.  Then we should find 
some practical way to configure G addresses for Router too. I'm not sure 
how to come up with G addresses for Router, for the above topology.

I'm not sure how to configure G4 on Gateway either.

Alex

> I think we consider MANET-like situation.
> 
> 
> 
>         For example, RA sent by Gateway, or any other address conf.
>         mechanisms.
>         Is it right ?
> 
> 
>     I'm not sure why the intermediary Router should have any other
>     address than its link-local addresses.
> 
>  
> Please refers to the above my opinion.
>  
> Hyung-Jin Lim
>  
> 
> 
>     Alex
> 
> 
>