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

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Sun, 13 December 2015 20:59 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
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 BD4BB1A1BDC for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 12:59:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.349
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.349 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] 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 VBPtwwLycdmE for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 12:59:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 897051A1BD2 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 12:59:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/56228) with ESMTP id tBDKx5hV017248 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:05 +0100
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/56228) with ESMTP id tBDKx467009450; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:04 +0100
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25F2761FA3; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:04 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 8FSigNuhLlSj; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from trurl.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr (col75-1-78-194-40-74.fbxo.proxad.net [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80F3561FA2; Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:01 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:01 +0100
Message-ID: <87wpsif4kq.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512132029350.20919@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <87a8pegqs5.wl-jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1512132029350.20919@uplift.swm.pp.se>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]); Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:05 +0100 (CET)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Sun, 13 Dec 2015 21:59:05 +0100 (CET)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 566DDC19.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-Miltered: at potemkin with ID 566DDC18.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 566DDC19.000 from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/null/potemkin.univ-paris7.fr/<jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 566DDC18.000 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 566DDC19.000 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 566DDC18.000 on potemkin.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/sLoriFlpFycIrATYupi2Vvna5UY>
Cc: homenet@ietf.org
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: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 20:59:08 -0000

>> I'm probably missing something -- but where in the HNCP document does it
>> say that applied prefixes must be announced over the routing protocol?
>> I don't see it in Section 6.3.3.

> I'd say the role of HNCP and the routing protocol and what does what, is
> not really specified anywhere.

HNCP does specify when the router MUST speak RA and DHCPv4, and SHOULD
speak DHCPv6-PD, so I'd expect it to have similar requirements for
routing.  It doesn't make a lot of sense to send RAs or perform prefix
delegation if you're not going to announce the prefix over the routing
protocol.

Markus, Stephen -- it's too late to change that, right?  If so, no big
deal, we'll put it in the Homenet profile for Babel.

> Otoh, it's very natural for me that a routing protocol would do
> "redistribute connected" or at least do this for interfaces marked as
> "HNCP". From my testing before on the actual OpenWRT implementations as
> they are configured out of the box as I tested them, it seemed babel was
> doing "redistribute connected" for all interfaces,

The OpenWRT hnetd configuration redistributes everything, indeed.  The
recommended shncpd configuration redistributes just hncpd routes:

    redistribute local deny
    redistribute proto 43 allow

("redistribute proto 43" is shncpd, "redistribute local" is locally
assigned addresses.)

(I'll go out on a limb, and argue that it's not HNCP's business to say
what the routing protocol does with non-Homenet routes -- it's hopefully
legal for a Homenet router to redistribute, say, RIPng into Babel --, so
both implementations are correct.)

-- Juliusz