IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Casm] [homenet] [Anima] prefix assignment

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 30 March 2017 14:51 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: casm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A26D12950E; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DkMp-I1Wqxg0; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00F39120726; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 07:51:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5966F203AD; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:15:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 122CA636BB; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:51:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>, "casm@ietf.org" <casm@ietf.org>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>
CC: Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Mark Townsley <townsley@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <C00EEDEA-22F3-4FFA-A5A3-55C4BDCFB587@darou.fr>
References: <21984.1490644275@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <CANMVOuzYpcBdG2ZOhEXRnQU0Q=_i0i-09SPKzruJnznVoWW=OA@mail.gmail.com> <9240.1490649148@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <672bec4c-0e93-362c-21bf-99938cd0a066@gmail.com> <27800.1490654163@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <27680a33-708d-84b7-f378-3a47ee71840a@gmail.com> <2491.1490716597@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <5a41375c-2a4c-d5ca-e703-06d8e76f8728@gmail.com> <28218.1490799848@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <4C898133-C860-4369-8BDC-E5868CA70EB9@cisco.com> <ec7c1878-0f6d-9f46-dacd-ed1aafd333b0@gmail.com> <C00EEDEA-22F3-4FFA-A5A3-55C4BDCFB587@darou.fr>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:51:51 -0400
Message-ID: <2329.1490885511@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/casm/T7M29KLsLCRi8YkDrHAZmtXCQU0>
Subject: Re: [Casm] [homenet] [Anima] prefix assignment
X-BeenThere: casm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Coordinated Address Space Management <casm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/casm>, <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/casm/>
List-Post: <mailto:casm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/casm>, <mailto:casm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 14:51:54 -0000

Pierre Pfister <pierre.pfister@darou.fr> wrote:
    > Absolutely. RFC7695 Applicability Statement (Section 3.) explains that
    > the algorithm can be used as
    > long as participating nodes gets configured with an eventually
    > consistent set of non-overlaping prefixes,
    > which are then used to carve-out sub-prefixes that are assigned to
    > link/nodes/objects/toasters.

I think that I can envision a situation where a largish distributed
enterprise could use auto-configuring Homenet technology in a "Small Office"
configuration, and would use a CASM/ANIMA mechanism at the edge to ask for
more address space from HQ.  (That could well be occuring via a VPN, or some
dark fiber, doesn't matter)

In that case, the HNCP and ANIMA parts would be in a common trust environment.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email