Re: [homenet] HNCP: interaction with routing protocol?

Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi> Mon, 14 December 2015 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BA861ACDA6 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 03:59:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.121
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.121 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=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 JxYcFJH4hK7y for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 03:59:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from julia1.inet.fi (mta-out1.inet.fi [62.71.2.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F6941ACDA3 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 03:59:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.200.82] (192.194.110.125) by julia1.inet.fi (9.0.002.03-2-gbe5d057) (authenticated as stenma-47) id 566976B5002299A3; Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:56:34 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\))
From: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512140712170.20919@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 13:59:10 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7C1CAB88-20CC-438A-BF1E-1AE6D4390207@iki.fi>
References: <87a8pegqs5.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512132029350.20919@uplift.swm.pp.se> <87wpsif4kq.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512140712170.20919@uplift.swm.pp.se>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/ElG19_C5uEBVoOUvkgiiVyd4QDE>
Cc: homenet@ietf.org, Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
Subject: Re: [homenet] HNCP: interaction with routing protocol?
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/homenet/>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 11:59:17 -0000

> On 14.12.2015, at 8.15, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 13 Dec 2015, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> 
>> The OpenWRT hnetd configuration redistributes everything, indeed.  The
>> recommended shncpd configuration redistributes just hncpd routes:
>> 
>>   redistribute local deny
>>   redistribute proto 43 allow
> 
> Just to be clear here, when you say "hnetd configuration" you are referring to babeld.conf that gets installed when you install hnetd-full? So it's really the babel configuraton that you get when installing hnetd?

The routing support script that enables routing on an interface (based on border discovery result) has hard-coded configuration for Babel which redistributes all routes.

> Because as far as I understand, hnetd doesn't do any redistribution into the routing protocol, this is done by configuring the routing protocol to look at interface addresses/prefix and communicating this to other participants in the routing protocol?
> 
> hnetd does address configuration on interfaces, the routing protocol picks this up because that's how it's configured...? Hnetd doesn't communicate directly with the routing protocol at all, right? It just sets up the landscape so the routing protocol can come and survey it and communicate the contents.

See above. Given fixed interface categories, static routing protocol configuration could work, but as is, the script provides list of interfaces that routing protocol _can_ run on given the current state of detected borders.

Cheers,

-Markus