Re: [dhcwg] Delegated prefix managed by multiple entities

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> writes:
> Richard, no offense, but this looks like a completely contrived
> example.   Why would you ever do that?   Does the routing
> infrastructure require you to do it?   Is it the easiest, most
> failsafe way to do it?   What if your DHCP server is accidentally
> configured so that it hands your customer the wrong prefix?   Why
> wouldn't the customer simply hard-code their provider-independent
> routes in their border gateways?

I think DHCP-PD based multihoming is not contrived example because it makes
customer life easier; they don't NEED to run routing protocol, nor have
manual configuration for that matter and the stuff 'just works' for some
definition of works (inbound traffic winds up at their RR; how RR sends
stuff out is another matter).

Given RAAN, or DHCPv6 traffic snooping at the first-hop delegating router
(aka DHCPv6 relay), you can also have relay responsible for pushing this
routing information. I find the server pushing routing state for someone
else somewhat distasteful, but possibly it's valid in some cases.

You need routability for the prefixes handed via PD; whether the route is
valid for the lease lifetime, or only when the interface is really
reachable (information not always available, subject to crashes somewhere
on the path, etc) is a matter of preference..

Cheers,

-Markus

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg