[homenet] other routing options

"Howard, Lee" <lee.howard@twcable.com> Tue, 22 November 2011 22:36 UTC

Return-Path: <lee.howard@twcable.com>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1432E11E80E4 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 14:36:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.264, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NKA6vAa4cDd1 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 14:36:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cdpipgw01.twcable.com (cdpipgw01.twcable.com [165.237.59.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 803E711E80D2 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 14:36:22 -0800 (PST)
X-SENDER-IP: 10.136.163.10
X-SENDER-REPUTATION: None
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,555,1315195200"; d="scan'208";a="300957361"
Received: from unknown (HELO PRVPEXHUB01.corp.twcable.com) ([10.136.163.10]) by cdpipgw01.twcable.com with ESMTP/TLS/RC4-MD5; 22 Nov 2011 17:31:38 -0500
Received: from PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.26]) by PRVPEXHUB01.corp.twcable.com ([10.136.163.10]) with mapi; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:36:22 -0500
From: "Howard, Lee" <lee.howard@twcable.com>
To: "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:36:20 -0500
Thread-Topic: other routing options
Thread-Index: AcypZyepGoWhHzHSQE6bpA+uksKGEg==
Message-ID: <DCC302FAA9FE5F4BBA4DCAD4656937791452BBC0CC@PRVPEXVS03.corp.twcable.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [homenet] other routing options
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 22:36:23 -0000

Ray asked for people to post drafts for anything other than OSPF, because without an alternative, it will appear that we have consensus on OSPF.  I haven't posted a draft on RIPng, because it would just work the way it's designed.

A few people said  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-howard-up-pio-00 is no better than RIP, and we already have RIP in home gateways.  Can any gateway vendor confirm whether RIPng is already in gateways?

Proposed alternatives are:
* OSPFv3.  It's heavyweight for home routing.  We still need a way to find the border and inject default.  It could be used for DHCP-PD.
* zOSPF.  It requires resurrecting work.  I don't how much work it needs, or how big the protocol is.
* UP PIO.  It's new work, and requires work.  It's lightweight, and solves the border problem, but not addressing.
* RIPng.  It's fairly lightweight, and it exists.  It solves only the routing problem.
* MANEMO.  It requires resurrecting work, is pretty lightweight, and solves addressing and border problems.

If you argue that we should reuse existing protocols (per the architecture draft), your choices are OSPFv3 or RIPng.  I really don't like OSPFv3 in the home--it's too much protocol, though if someone can tell me about memory footprint, that would be helpful.

I also prefer draft-baker-homenet-prefix-assignment, so we don't need OSPF for addressing.

Any discussion?

Lee


This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.