RE: Comments on IPv6 Prefix Subdelegation

I'm sorry if the following questions show my ignorance, but, here
goes...

Why does it need to be a dynamic routing protocol? Why not a simple
configuration protocol, like with RFC 4191 or a DHCPv6 option as
suggested in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dec-dhcpv6-route-option-01? 

Why do the peered routers (such as CPE RTR 1 and 2, in Fig 3) need to
know which routes other routers claim to serve? There shouldn't be
misdirected traffic, if the  routes are known to downstream devices. Or
is it the home/office RTRs (Fig 3) who need to know which prefixes have
been assigned to each other, advertising on their WAN interfaces? It
seems like if the home/office RTRs don't know about each other, it
doesn't really hurt efficiency that much; it'll still work. They'll send
the messages up to the next hop (CPE RTR) serving that prefix, and then
it'll get routed down to the right home/office RTR.

If peered CPE RTRs do need to know each others' routes, why can't they
get it through an RFC 4191 or DHCPv6 method (this would be on the LAN
interface). I realize that there are those who say it's wrong for them
to solicit (RS or DHCPv6) on their LAN interfaces -- but why is it
wrong?

And don't these routes need to get propagated down to the hosts, because
hosts may individually have multiple interfaces (e.g., smartphone with
Wi-Fi and 3G)?
Barbara

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipv6-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of
> Fred Baker
> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2009 6:05 AM
> To: Azinger, Marla
> Cc: draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-cpe-router@tools.ietf.org;
draft-donley-ipv6-
> cpe-rtr-use-cases-and-reqs@tools.ietf.org; IETF IPv6 Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Comments on IPv6 Prefix Subdelegation
> 
> 
> On Jul 29, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Azinger, Marla wrote:
> 
> > Routing in such an environment calls for a routing protocol. Each
> > CPE must run either RIPv6 [RFC2080], IS-IS [RFC5308], or OSPF
> > [RFC5340] on a default route and to the homes interal upstream a
> > static default route. The issues raised in [RFC3704] also apply,
> > meaning that the two CPE routers may each need to observe the source
> > addresses in datagrams  they handle to divert them to the other CPE
> > to handle upstream
> 
> I'll figure something out there. This makes it sound like only the CPE
> routers have to run a routing protocol; in fact, all of the routers in
> the home have to run a routing protocol. But yes, something like that.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------