Re: [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd (DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO) to Proposed Standard

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Sat, 11 September 2010 12:22 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D23E3A6801; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:22:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.669
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.580, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 48BtrBwpFJmc; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:22:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1-g21.free.fr (smtp1-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E60A3A6765; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 05:22:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [82.239.213.32]) by smtp1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48C1094013A; Sat, 11 Sep 2010 14:22:35 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4C8B7486.9050405@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 14:22:30 +0200
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.0; fr; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100825 Thunderbird/3.1.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Subject: Re: [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd (DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO) to Proposed Standard
References: <C8B15B3F.15082%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
In-Reply-To: <C8B15B3F.15082%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 100910-1, 10/09/2010), Outbound message
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, mext <mext@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2010 12:22:19 -0000

Le 11/09/2010 08:13, Hesham Soliman a écrit :
>
>
>
> On 11/09/10 12:34 AM, "Alexandru Petrescu"<alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 10/09/2010 14:12, Hesham Soliman a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> When it is away from home it is fully a Host on the egress
>>>> interface. When at home fully Router on same.  I am happy with it
>>>> this way.
>>>>
>>>
>>> =>   Ok that doesn't make any sense to me.
>>
>> Well, let me rephrase as the RFC text puts it: when the MR is at home it
>> joins the all-routers multicast address, otherwise it joins the
>> all-hosts address.  ND spec says similar.  Similarly, when MR at home it
>> can send RAs on the egress, if away it MUST NOT send RAs on it.  It must
>> always send RAs on the ingress.  This is to make sure MR doesn't break
>> the Internet routing.
>>
>> Does this sound better?
>
> =>  I thought we were discussing the specific issue of how to solve this
> problem in _this_WG_ as I mentioned in my first email. I know what the RFC
> says and I wouldn't have done it this way but given this, I don't know how
> else you can solve it _here_.

I am open to solve it here and I have suggestion :

- make DHCPv6-PD-NEMO assign a default route to the Mobile Router at
   home.

What do you think?

I also followed advice and went asking to DHC WG.  I got redirected to 
MIF soon-Charter DHCP options route table, and got mentioned 
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router req W-3 talking DHCPv6-PD and default 
route.

Alex


>
> Hesham
>
>
>
>
>