Re: [mif] Default Route with DHCPv6 on a single-egress-interfaced Mobile Router (was: Recharter discussion - update again)

[Maglione Roberta <[e-mail]>]

Hello Alex,
      There was a draft sometimes ago about a new DHCPv6 option for the default route
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-default-router-00

the draft now seems expired, but I remember a long religious discussion about DHCPv6 versus RA to provide the default route.

Regards,
Roberta

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu
Sent: sabato 11 settembre 2010 14.16
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [mif] Default Route with DHCPv6 on a single-egress-interfaced Mobile Router (was: Recharter discussion - update again)

Hello MIF,

I have a particular interest in MIF for simultaneous use of multiple
egress interfaces for bandwidth augmentation on a Mobile Router.  But it
is not for this reason I post now.  I post now to ask about Default
Route delivered to a single-egress-interfaced Mobile Router.  This
discussion was originated in the MEXT WG upon IESG LC of the
DHCPv6-PD-NEMO draft, then redirected to DHC WG then MIF WG was
mentioned too.

Le 31/08/2010 04:56, Hui Deng a écrit :
[...]
> 2) DHCPv6 routing configuration: a specification of DHCPv6 options
> allowing client nodes to perform route table configuration.

Would this item allow for a draft describing the way in which
DHCPv6(/-PD) assigns a Default Route to a single-egress-interfaced
Mobile Router?

My problem is a Mobile Router connected on the home link.  It acquires a
prefix (the Mobile Network Prefix) using DHCPv6-PD.  Being a Router it
doesn't configure a default route from SLAAC (if I want it to I have to
switch it from Router to Host - burdensome).  DHCPv6 doesn't deliver it
a Default Route either.  So I am left with a nice machine without a
default route - I have to manually configure it.

I could write a draft telling that DHCPv6 option is delivered to a
single-egress-interfaced Mobile Router and allows it to configure a
default route.  Would this draft fit within this potential Charter item?

Any comments appreciated: is this kind of work appropriate here?  Is
another alternative work (like DHCPv6 tells Router to acquire this from
SLAAC, and modify SLAAC)?  Could this be adapted to MIF by saying there
_could_ be multiple such egress interfaces each with its own default
route (hard, there should be only one default - the last resort)?

Any comments appreciated about how to set a default route on a Mobile
Router single-egress interface.

Alex

> 3) MIF API: While no changes are needed for applications to run on
> multiple interface hosts, this API could provide additional services
> to applications running on hosts attached to multiple provisioning
> domains. For instance, these services could help in solving
> first-hop, source address and/or DNS selection issues. Goals and
> Milestones Nov 2010: Initial WG draft on Split-DNS solution Nov 2010:
> Initial WG draft on DHCPv6 option for routing configuration Nov 2010:
> Initial WG draft on MIF API extension. Nov 2011: Submit Split-DNS
> solution to IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC Nov 2011:
> Submit DHCPv6 routing configuration option to IESG for publication as
> a Proposed Standard RFC Nov 2011: Submit MIF API extension solution
> to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ mif mailing list
> [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

_______________________________________________
mif mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif

Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie.

This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks.