IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Announcing Prefix Delegation extensions to ND draft-kaiser-nd-pd-00.txt

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 23 October 2012 17:44 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
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 9987911E80D9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.549
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.549 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RZAh0RSvc7qi for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBA2211E80D5 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id fc26so4979613vbb.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=AA5Mqwx4+SmJ3/QsvE1oa/kL9bsrPsxv3jNJJOxM/0w=; b=ClzyzQHX5L1dck/mDXDVkjBPSi/Iyu2VTVZBSLhOdJk86cAdrf+J7P7Tkkx+hA9Gb+ 3kOT1PocKJ8Oz6wO1E6qFy4QlZEgS/RFfcG+va93HA1Isj3WjOmPDg65+1y0kLCWsSXI aZXr7IzmpXRI7NBuYDMZHe5WSb0MKtiTkvJcisbxvLgXdHnKtCmOD55/UTO8QVWZSZ8D Ou4odXnMuIY8zXShWs2AdbMKVFrSWw7EcQ57eVhVnDyIGkSMxHVc24vkjJk3YctMglnO Zcs8Mw4tNvNi7NxA0iB040TYduIhBwPUPEteSUGxOOE669ftb2yMm4jIe4a7Tz3TBl5P IUww==
Received: by 10.52.37.196 with SMTP id a4mr17832394vdk.104.1351014286026; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.86.246.227] (198-135-0-233.cisco.com. [198.135.0.233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id qj8sm12994015veb.2.2012.10.23.10.44.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:44:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Announcing Prefix Delegation extensions to ND draft-kaiser-nd-pd-00.txt
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <50868827.9020509@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:44:32 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <68437632-7990-47ED-8364-EBF80791D318@gmail.com>
References: <5081087D.2020807@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210191006140.28593@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CAC8QAccjPmKhk3dJQC8KHRFuDUvNYOY-sdfnN7GAcdwEbVHKwA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210191814280.28593@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5082C948.3080109@gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1210201837140.28593@uplift.swm.pp.se> <5082E933.60205@gmail.com> <50868827.9020509@gmail.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Cc: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>, IPv6 <ipv6@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 17:44:47 -0000

On Oct 23, 2012, at 2:05 PM 10/23/12, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> On 20/10/2012 19:10, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> ..
>> But with vehicles, one connects a vehicle here and gets a prefix, then
>> moves in that area and gets another prefix.  At that point, if the
>> router obtaining a prefix wants to delegate further to another vehicle
>> needs to change the delegated prefix.
> 
> Why wouldn't RPL be used for such networks? It has built-in PD for
> dynamic networks, if I understand it correctly, with RA used at the
> subnet level.

My understanding is that RPL assumes a multi-link subnet, with a single prefix used across the entire network and source routing or host-specific routing.

- Ralph

> 
>    Brian
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email