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

Brian E Carpenter <> Wed, 29 March 2017 23:04 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73564129631; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:04:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xq7zwxoZaaKl; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64F7F129572; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 190so11422060itm.3; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:04:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cTFHsouxE3/yMR/FXksA1Btsf0Q1oZje3k8oykMT7x4=; b=gEtx2tnxJtPuzaRKjRYNT25gm+dgypFrn7KBO2sOl5yn/dIRX36L4j5vHqOTwkmAJV P5/609heesE913NhtOmXCAvW081CEqdauQM8eC5Vm2w73cwyhc7GrD5owFzlE+ifq07+ 9DEgYmbnKuanhFp4ZtO/eEdbzjCwx2M3OwIorFHNJCcLK8y8ZXtbueUF0Kid4NsaLGdf Zslw8mD3ZaVaQdYWilx8Tt+1vnW5FrlJKC5CDqiz/jM+ohFs2rP3rfiwyL7oUWBHv3/T LsbHhJFaJ7Qxu2RWgJhDekmtAL8t10afXPj9XFdNHY+ciDpzlaCO4ilvxMcJgJSl4jPk fT+Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cTFHsouxE3/yMR/FXksA1Btsf0Q1oZje3k8oykMT7x4=; b=WeeUppyXueSkeN+z8lmFmQywwCZ4l9wYKzG009lw+6V7dQ9Clw3EC+Eb+g7iquUMKY O8EdgTqy5XjF2y/IUNMMyM5FcfW072f8EqpR+tPhRwC8NXUq8XeA/loUSD1+BGuiqZPA utVel1RFN5hNQWGi42FSfFvIaAsPmaSDNtjB8fML5qv2/yRcMCIMhQhHtqgv/V7vGkra PK6NsMbdCQfHWzoYP0HwQhgXNBtnWX3SRuGuR4Dw8kvNtyJxYUpkyzb3MrIn0XcdBCav 40PdOIoV4z0EhgtebWsUWqkukZe/5d8gD74rHEkYeWEmlFRb4zME7ArzrpJYIE0r451Y 0xRA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2bIBnMFYff0+cj/rDBxCBAc+Wca+KImhkw/HQQVRDOFHJoCosmpegxrRil6MqG6Q==
X-Received: by with SMTP id u15mr1091888ita.58.1490828689611; Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:04:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:370:128:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ( [2001:67c:370:128:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by with ESMTPSA id b126sm410720ioa.55.2017. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 16:04:48 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Mark Townsley (townsley)" <>, Michael Richardson <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 12:04:54 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Casm] [Anima] [homenet] prefix assignment
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Coordinated Address Space Management <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 23:04:52 -0000

On 30/03/2017 11:14, Mark Townsley (townsley) wrote:
>> On Mar 29, 2017, at 10:04 AM, Michael Richardson <> wrote:
>> This discussion started in a private thread, so I'll try to bring people
>> up-to-date by repeating and moving around text.
>> The ANIMA GRASP reference problem Autonomic Service Agent (ASA), is
>> to do distributed prefix allocation.  This is very much in the space of
>> *coordinated* address management.
>> (My take, BTW, is that CASM should be considered the first spin-off WG
>> From ANIMA...)
>> Mark and Brian discussed how HNCP does prefix distribution within Homenet.
> I was really pointing out that RFC 7695 could be used independent of HNCP. 
> HNCP is just one protocol that uses the RFC 7695 distributed prefix assignment algorithm (which actually began as extensions to OSPF before HNCP even existed).

True. And I don't see any reason why a CASM system including autonomic service
agents shouldn't be used to supply prefixes for use by an RFC7695 implementation.
So the various tools can fit together.

> - Mark
>> Brian then suggests:
>>  brian> But if the CE includes a little autonomic service agent (ASA) which
>>  brian> is in the ISP's security domain (not the SOHO domain), it can act for
>>  brian> HNCP to solicit address space from the ISP. That's the southern side
>>  brian> of the CASM model and the northern side of HNCP.
>> I asked a simple question: don't we have DHCPv6 for this?
>> I also then asked:
>>> a) the CPE device is now part of the ISP's ACP.
>>> That's okay if the CPE device is owned by the ISP and/or the CPE device
>>> includes some kind of trusted computation environment.
>>> {But a CPE owned by the ISP, might not be trusted by the home owner,
>>> so another router in between would be needed,
>> Brian answered:
>>> Really? Why not?
>> I don't think that the ISP can trust to have code controlled by end users
>> running in their ACP domain.
>> I also think that many end-users will be quite reasonably upset that their
>> ISPs can snoop on their internal traffic.  This may in fact violate many
>> work-at-home agreements; which is often the case of why you see multiple
>> routers/firewalls in documents like
>> (Fred had more interesting diagrams in presentations, which I could dig up)
>>>> b) DHCPv6 PD is already the protocol that solves prefix allocation across
>>>> trust boundaries.
>>> Indeed. That's why we have "PD supported"  as a Boolean property of the
>>> PrefixManager objective. There's no intention to undermine PD.
>> Why do I need to run a protocol in order to find if I can run a protocol,
>> when DHCP has the same mechanism already.  And use of DHCPv6 itself is well
>> defined in cable and DSL connections already.
>>>> I would think that the ISP's DSLAM/BMS/CMTS would have an ASA that deals with
>>>> prefixes.  It would speak DHCPv6-PD to the south, and GRASP/ASA to the north.
>>> Yes, the DSLAM is definitely a good place to put one.
>>>> North of the ISP's device would be the ISP's (distributed) IPAM.
>>>> GRASP/ASA-Prefix would be the protocol between.
>>> Anyway, my point is that these approaches (ANIMA, HNCP and PD) are
>>> complementary not competitors.
>> I don't see you saying that.
>> I see ou trying to extend two internal mechanisms (ANIMA in the ISP, and HNCP
>> in the home) such that they interact directly, rather than using PD.  You
>> say this right here:
>>  brian> But if the CE includes a little autonomic service agent (ASA) which
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>> _______________________________________________
>> homenet mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Anima mailing list