Re: [Autoconf] Summary of topologies and addressing discussed recently
Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Tue, 03 March 2009 16:59 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 DB1E83A6917 for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:59:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.03
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.03 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.081, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, MANGLED_LIST=2.3]
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 N9hIs8ViSxJV for <autoconf@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:59:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB623A684F for <Autoconf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:59:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28E4794019C; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:59:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (bur91-3-82-239-213-32.fbx.proxad.net [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 725A39401DD; Tue, 3 Mar 2009 17:59:32 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <49AD61F1.7010109@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:59:29 +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: <49AD55AB.5040304@gmail.com> <7e8d02d40903030820o728288c4l11dc7db8f5d1c02b@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7e8d02d40903030820o728288c4l11dc7db8f5d1c02b@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 090303-0, 03/03/2009), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Cc: Autoconf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Autoconf] Summary of topologies and addressing discussed recently
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: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:59:16 -0000
Hi Hyung-Jin, HyungJin Lim a écrit : > Hi, Alex > > I think we should identify the impacts from address model we can choice. > for example, whether packet forwarding or packet routing. > > The packet routing needs a satisfied route distributed time. > While the packet forwarding needs additional processing time for tunneling. I think packet forwarding and packet routing is the same (I've heard of 'map&encap' to mean something where a router presented with a packet to forward it searches its routing table (map) and then finds the next hop to be a tunnel interface, so it encapsulates the original packet). > What do we should choice for proper address model? I think the best address architecture one could come up with is the one that could be drawn on paper and circulated on the mailing list and agreed on by several people. > I don't think only simplest scenario is important. Let's first agree on the simplest scenario. What's the simplest scenario for you? Alex > > Thanks > > Hyung-Jin, Lim > > 2009/3/4 Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com > <mailto:alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>> > > Dear AUTOCONFers, > > Recently there was discussion on the mailing list about topologies > and addressing for AUTOCONF. Some topologies for AUTOCONF were > named and classified as: > -only-MANET > -MANET-to-Internet and > -MANET-to-MANET-to-Internet (three or more levels) > -MANET-to-Internet-to-MANET > > Some topologies were pictured in more detail - they're listed below as > a summary. Some participants seemed to agree on these topologies or > on some of their variations. > > A simple topology: > > ----- 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. > > > A simple topology with Routers: > > ------- wifi "adhoc1" ------- wifi "adhoc2" ------- > |Router1|---------------|Router2|---------------|Router3| > ------ LL1 LL2 -------LL3 LL4 ------- > G1 G4 > > G1, G4: ? > > > More details on the simple topology with Routers, /64 prefixes and > /128 addresses: > > ----- wifi "adhoc1" ------ wifi "adhoc2" ----- > |Host1|---------------|Router|---------------|Host2| > ----- LL1 P1 LL2 ------ LL3 P2 LL4 ----- > G1 G4 > > G1, G4: IPv6 global addresses, for example > 2001:db8:1::1/128 and > 2001:db8:2::4/128 > Manually assigned, or pre-configured with SNMP > or formed according to stateless autoconf rfc4862; > the prefixes are advertised by Router in RAs. > P1, P2: IPv6 global prefixes, for example > 2001:db8:1::/64 and > 2001:db8:2::/64 > Manually assigned, or pre-configured with SNMP. > > Connecting it to Internet: > > ----- wifi "adhoc1" ------ wifi "adhoc2" -------- / > |Host1|---------------|Router|---------------|Gatewway|---| Internet > ----- 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: ? > > > Connecting it to Internet via a Satellite link: > > ------ wifi "adhoc1" ------ wifi "adhoc2" -------- Satelite / > |NEMOMR|---------------|Router|---------------|Gatewway|--------Int'net > ------ LL1 LL2 ------ LL3 LL4 -------- TCA1 \ > 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. > > > > In the multi-hop network below only /64 prefixes are present in > Routers' routing tables, no /128 (host-based) routes: > > > ----- wifi "adhoc1" ------ wifi "adhoc2" ------- "adhoc3"----- > |Host1|---------------|Router|---------------|Router2|-------|Host2| > ----- LL1 P1 LL2 ------ LL3 P2 LL4 -------LL5 P3 LL6--- > G1 G4 > > P1, P2, P3: /64 prefixes, such as: > 2001:db8:1::/64 > 2001:db8:2::/64 and > 2001:db8:3::/64 > > > Breaking the connectivity: > > ------- wifi "adhoc1" ----- ???? ----- "adhoc2" -------- > |Router1|---------------|Host1|--/ /--|Host2|---------|Router2| > ------- LL2 P1 LL1 --- ----LL6 P2 LL6------ > G1 G4 > > Adding more interfaces of different types: > > Router1 and Router2 are out of range. So R1 <--> H2 and H1 <--> R2. > Host1 MUST communicate to Host2, this is critical (live or dead). > > +-------+ wifi "adhoc1" +-------+ wifi "adhoc2" +-------+ > |Router1|>-------------<|Router2|>-------------<|Router3| > +---L---+ LL1 LL21 +---L---+ LL22 LL3 +---L---+ > |M1 |M2 |M3 > > "adhoc1" and "adhoc2": 802.11 SSIDs in "IBSS" mode. > Each IBSS is an IPv6 subnet. > > L: Loopback interface. > > >, <: MANET interface. > > LL1, LL21, LL22, LL3: IPv6 link-local addresses. > Self-formed according to rfc2464. > > M1, M2, M3: IPv6 MANET local addresses, for example > FD01:db8::1/128, FD01:db8::2/128 and FD01:db8::3/128. > Manually assigned, or pre-configured (e.g. with SNMP) > or formed according to a to be defined [Autoconf for MANETs] > protocol, with a to-be-defined prefix (e.g. ULA, RFC4193). > > > Again connecting to the Internet, this time via an Access Router: > > Internet > | > | > +-------+-------+ > | Access Router | > +-------+-------+ > | > | | Prefix information > | V > | > +-------+ wifi "adhoc1" +---+---+ wifi "adhoc2" +-------+ > |Router1|>-------------<|Router2|>-------------<|Router3| > +---L---+ LL1 LL21 +---L---+ LL22 LL3 +---L---+ > |M1 |M2 |M3 > |G1 |G2 |G3 > <------- -------> > Prefix information Prefix information > > > G1, G2, G3: IPv6 globally unique addresses, for example > 2001:db8:G:1/128, 2001:db8:G:2/128 and 2001:db8:G:3/128. > Formed according to a to be defined [Autoconf for MANETs] > protocol, with the prefix provided by (via) the Access Router. > > > Adding Multi-homing: > > ---+-------Internet--------+--- > | | > | | > +-------+-------+ +-------+-------+ > |Access Router H| |Access Router G| > +-------+-------+ +-------+-------+ > | | > ||Prefix information H | |Prefix information G > |V | V > | | > +---+---+ wifi "adhoc1" +---+---+ wifi "adhoc2" +-------+ > |Router1|>-------------<|Router2|>-------------<|Router3| > +---L---+ LL1 LL21 +---L---+ LL22 LL3 +---L---+ > |M1 |M2 |M3 > |G1 |G2 |G3 > |H1 |H2 |H3 > <------- -------> > Prefix information G Prefix information G, H > ---------> > Prefix information H > > H1, H2, H3: IPv6 globally unique addresses, for example > 2001:db8:H:1/128, 2001:db8:H:2/128 and 2001:db8:H:3/128. > Formed according to a to be defined [Autoconf for MANETs] > protocol, with the prefix provided by (via) Access Router H. > > > Effect of some links disappearing: > > > ---+-------Internet------ > | > | > +-------+-------+ > |Access Router H| > +-------+-------+ > | > ||Prefix information H > |V wifi "adhoc1" > | <---------------------------v--------> > <------|--v----------------------> | > |<-|--------------------v-----------------------|---> > | | | | > +---+--'+ +---'---+ +---'---+ > |Router1|>-------------<|Router2|>-------------<|Router4| > +---L---+ LL1 LL21 +---L---+ LL22 LL4 +---L---+ > |M1 |M2 |M4 > |H1 |H2 |H4 > > ---------> ---------> > Prefix information H Prefix information H > > > No computer movement, but obstacle mouvement: > > (802.11 term: STA is station) > > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > | | | | > | ____STA-B | | ____STA-B | > | ___/ | | | ___/ | > | STA-A | | | STA-A OBSTACLE | > | '--_ | | | '--_ | > | '----STA-C | | '----STA-C | > | OBSTACLE | | | > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > 1-1: No hindrance 1-2: B-C blocked > > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > | | | O | > | ____STA-B | | B STA-B | > | ___/ | | | S | | > | STA-A OB | | | STA-A T | | > | ST | | | A | | > | AC STA-C | | C STA-C | > | LE | | LE | > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > 1-3: A-C blocked 1-4: A-B & A-C blocked > > MANET Scenarios with blocking obstacle > > > Compare with this one: > > (802.11 term: AP is access point) > > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > | | | | > | ____STA-B | | ____STA-B | > | ___/ | | ___/ | > | AP-A | | AP-A OBSTACLE | > | '--_ | | '--_ | > | '----STA-C | | '----STA-C | > | OBSTACLE | | | > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > 4-1: No hindrance 4-2: No hindrance > > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > | | | O | > | ____STA-B | | B STA-B | > | ___/ | | S | > | AP-A OB | | AP-A T | > | ST | | A | > | AC STA-C | | C STA-C | > | LE | | LE | > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > 4-3: A-C & B-C blocked 4-4: All blocked > > 802.11 BSS L2 topology with blocking obstacle > > > |HAving them pictured, may I ask you: do you think anything will ever be > |able to communicate through Obstacles? > > > Yes, of course. > > > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > | | | | > | ____STA-B | | ____STA-B | > | ___/ 1 | | | ___/ 1 . | > | STA-A | 1 | | STA-A obstacle 5 | > | '--_ 1 | | | '--_ 1 . | > | '----STA-C | | '----STA-C | > | obstacle | | | > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > 2-1: No hindrance 2-2: B-C degraded > > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > | | | o | > | ____STA-B | | 5 b ...STA-B | > | ___/ 1 | | | ...s. | | > | STA-A ob | 1 | | STA-A t | 1 | > | ... st | | | ...a. | | > | 5 .ac..STA-C | | 5 c ...STA-C | > | le | | le | > +------------------------+ +------------------------+ > 2-3: A-C degraded 2-4: A-B & A-C degraded > > Scenarios with degrading obstacle > > > I depicted the metrics: 1 is good, 5 is degraded. > > Here the routing tables, with metrics: > > ROUTER DEST NEXTHOP METRIC ROUTER DEST NEXTHOP METRIC > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > | A | B | B | 1 | | A | B | B | 1 | > | | C | C | 1 | | | C | C | 1 | > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > | B | A | A | 1 | | B | A | A | 1 | > | | C | C | 1 | | | C | C | 5 | > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > | C | A | A | 1 | | C | A | A | 1 | > | | B | B | 1 | | | B | B | 5 | > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > 11-1: No hindrance 11-2: B-C is degraded > > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > | A | B | B | 1 | | A | B | B | 5 | > | | C | C | 5 | | | C | C | 5 | > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > | B | A | A | 1 | | B | A | A | 5 | > | | C | C | 1 | | | C | C | 1 | > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > | C | A | A | 5 | | C | A | A | 5 | > | | B | B | 1 | | | B | B | 1 | > +-------+-------+-------+------+ +-------+-------+-------+------+ > 11-3: A-C degraded 11-4: A-B & A-C degraded > > Alex thanking the participants. > > _______________________________________________ > Autoconf mailing list > Autoconf@ietf.org <mailto:Autoconf@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf > >
- Re: [Autoconf] Summary of topologies and addressi… Alexandru Petrescu
- [Autoconf] Summary of topologies and addressing d… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [Autoconf] Summary of topologies and addressi… HyungJin Lim