Re: [Autoconf] new charter

Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es> Thu, 26 February 2009 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
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 87A0C3A6879 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:41:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 EzcFVW0bVVxs for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:41:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp01.uc3m.es (smtp01.uc3m.es [163.117.176.131]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FF823A680E for <autoconf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 12:41:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.12] (82.159.31.227.dyn.user.ono.com [82.159.31.227]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp01.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTP id E860FBA3D15; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:41:34 +0100 (CET)
From: Carlos =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Bernardos Cano <cjbc@it.uc3m.es>
To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49A6F125.40400@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>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-R/WxRD+hRqi8jGBWIS5P"
Organization: Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:41:27 +0100
Message-Id: <1235680887.4585.5.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.3116-5.6.0.1016-16488.001
Cc: autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] new charter
X-BeenThere: autoconf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
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 20:41:22 -0000

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.

Kind Regards,

Carlos

-- 
 Carlos Jesús Bernardos Cano     http://www.netcoms.net
 GPG FP: D29B 0A6A 639A A561 93CA  4D55 35DC BA4D D170 4F67
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  WEEDEV 2009: 2nd Workshop on Experimental Evaluation and
        Deployment Experiences on Vehicular networks
                  http://www.weedev.org/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++