IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03

Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> Sat, 01 June 2013 19:06 UTC

Return-Path: <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4963E21F9D58; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 12:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 PlP-Fi8QMTGD; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 12:06:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CDD21F9CAA; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 12:06:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost.ecs.soton.ac.uk [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r51J61tR017349; Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:06:01 +0100
X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk r51J61tR017349
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1370113562; bh=kgCpTkylLRqeYpTx56wDLan0R9U=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=eicHj9d+YVN3P+jU5uXNyt85YApo5BkGwR3UpJvOG2OtAdYsxhkk3Ck/Lr1iqW33/ Jk632TAsHD73+EfFluqi+H/Fa0YT8k8F4PkU6vN/w8bHGq+c3jBkYmpRTLuyk92e5r E+N8kkmD52DhDkZR6hxr0gyqTdGVdqYDisy6Ty54=
Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk> with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id p50K610430649660b7 ret-id none; Sat, 01 Jun 2013 20:06:02 +0100
Received: from [192.168.1.103] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r51J5XDD004991 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Jun 2013 20:05:34 +0100
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_18CFA72D-FE29-4E03-A49A-570EBEA57B56"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\))
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Could IPv6 address be more than locator?//draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix-03
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <AE05ED64-72CF-4440-AFFE-C35B0353F1DA@delong.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 20:05:37 +0100
Message-ID: <EMEW3|573405c1af41370c3d81b50dab869c98p50K6103tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|D3B15E0C-481E-49E5-B944-59F99ECE5DCF@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
References: <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AC98DAE@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <03680813-07D9-459B-A229-FA974C9A4B9E@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <8E492087-390E-4F8E-8078-1D0E63849243@delong.com> <EMEW3|f3c1b4957f182cbee8e02a76a09ead4dp4Y7Ye03tjc|ecs.soton.ac.uk|03680813-07D9-459B-A229-FA974C9A4B9E@ecs.soton.ac.uk> <CAKD1Yr0E5OUsphjhEaaMTjVarSGNdPEx6e1RyKDs5A=bkHGvBg@mail.gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AC992D2@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CAKD1Yr1c+-S02oWF1GjTdu-Vatee-EgXLKr=2=xdtYOtUubsYQ@mail.gmail.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AC99354@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <B001C1A1-DCF6-43AD-A792-56A58661E924@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751BD21E@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <65746D62-1F0E-4FAD-AC6A-270BD5757C8A@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751BFE2D@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <F8A3E2C6-57B1-4276-93F8-86E962368182@delong.com> <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751C0209@mbx-01.win.nominum.com> <AE05ED64-72CF-4440-AFFE-C35B0353F1DA@delon! g.com> <D3B15E0C-481E-49E5-B944-59F99ECE5DCF@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503)
X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean
X-smtpf-Report: sid=p50K61043064966000; tid=p50K610430649660b7; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=5:0; fails=0
X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: r51J61tR017349
X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Cc: "<v6ops@ietf.org>" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix@tools.ietf.org" <draft-jiang-v6ops-semantic-prefix@tools.ietf.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 19:06:21 -0000

On 1 Jun 2013, at 13:42, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:

> 
> On Jun 1, 2013, at 5:58 AM, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
> 
>> On May 31, 2013, at 10:47 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>>> What solutions exist today that provide for the home of the future where there are, in fact, multiple levels of routers many of which are managing routers underneath them with multiple links attached?
>> 
>> There's a fairly ugly DHCPv6 PD binary splitting solution that's actually been implemented, which is not efficient because it does sub-delegations of >/64 prefixes to internal routers.   There's the better PD solution that lets the router that got the initial delegation sub-delegate /64s throughout the home, which results in efficient use of the initial prefix.   And there's delegation over ZOSPF, for which there is running code that the implementors seem to think works, and which is also efficient in its use of prefixes.   This is a solved problem.
>> 
> 
> URLs to documentation of any/all of the above?
> 
> The only one I was aware of was the first one you mentioned, which, while running is fairly primitive in its capabilities.
> 
> The second one sounds like it gets pretty dysfunctional if you have downstream routers with downstream routers.
> 
> I haven't even heard of the third one, so absent some reference, I can't really comment.


zOSPF-based:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ospf-ospfv3-autoconfig-00
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment-04

DHCP-based:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-grundemann-homenet-hipnet-01
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-homenet-prefix-assignment-01

See also
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-homenet-arch-08#page-25

There are at least two interoperable implementations of the zOSPF solution using different platforms (bird and quagga)

Tim

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email