Re: [dhcwg] Advancing RFC 3315 and RFC 3633 to Internet Standard

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 24/09/2013 10:32, Ralph Droms a écrit :
>
> On Sep 23, 2013, at 3:58 PM 9/23/13, Alexandru Petrescu
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> Le 23/09/2013 15:55, Tomek Mrugalski a écrit :
>>> On 23.09.2013 13:50, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>>>> Le 22/09/2013 19:57, Leaf Yeh a écrit :
>>>>> Ralph > The piece of network equipment that implements the
>>>>> relay agent routes, and that network equipment *might* also
>>>>> need a route.
>>>>>
>>>>> On the PE router implementing relay for DHCPv6-PD, it always
>>>>> needs add the associated route for the CE's network of
>>>>> delegated prefix. I can't see *might* here.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with the doubt.  I don't see a might, but rather a
>>>> must. Otherwise it doesn't work.
>>>>
>>>> But maybe I dont understand the word 'might' as a native
>>>> speaker could hear it.
>>> Relay agent is functionality that can be provided by a piece of
>>> software. You can run it on any box that is connected to more
>>> than one network. Although typically such a box serves as a
>>> router, it doesn't have to.
>>
>> You mean a Relay agent which runs on a pure Host (single real
>> interface, no additional virtual/real interfaces)?
>>
>> Even in that case it (or the Router on the same link which is
>> connected to the Internet) will need to install a route towards
>> the Requesting Router's interface for the delegated prefix.
>
> And there's the exact point of the discussion - if the relay agent
> is not implemented on the router that needs the route, passing the
> route in the DHCPv6 message exchange through the relay agent won't
> get the route to the appropriate router.
>
>>
>> In all cases, the Relay and other routers on that link MUST
>> install a route.
>
> And how does that route get to the other routers?

They are all on the same link, and one mechanism used to install routes
dynamically is during ICMP Redirect.

>> Whether they do it at allocation time, at ICMP Redirect time, or
>> at manual config time - is another matter.
>
> I'm not saying the route installation can't be accomplished through
> DHCPv6.  I think you'll need to address the specific issues I raised
> in previous e-mail to publish a specification for passing routing
> information to the appropriate router through a DHCPv6 message
> exchange with a host.

Ok, my point is whether or not we could formulate a problem statement
for this: there is a need for a route in the concerned routers, after
the PD operation.  Without that route the communication can't be
established between Hosts configured with an address prefixed by the
delegated prefix.

Alex

>
> - Ralph
>
>>
>> Without that route the whole schmillblick doesn't work.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________ dhcwg mailing list
>>  [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg
>
>
>