Re: [nemo] Re: don't deprecate DHAAD (was: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-nemo-dhcpv6-pd-01.txt)

[Francis Dupont <[e-mail]>]

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   > [...] and there has also been a talk about deprecating DHAAD (I
   > disagree with deprecating DHAAD).
   
=> it seems it was a good idea to change the subject (:-)

   I disagree too with deprecating DHAAD.
   
=> there are two basic issues with DHAAD:
 - the needed function is more HA assignment than HA discovery.
 - the current anycast DHAAD mechanism can't be made secure.
Please note the current DHAAD is optional.

   I think there is one draft dhaad-harmful.
   
=> yes, I am its editor. The proposal is to switch to the DNS SRV RR
from the bootstrapping DT. BTW I believe it is useful to work on
all kinds of HA switching mechanisms too.

   But there is draft-arkko-mip6-3775bis-ndmobext-00 which clearly mentions
   the HA list and it being maintained by DHAAD.
   
=> is your argument about the function or about the mechanism?

   There is at least one implementation of non-anycast DHAAD which works 
   just fine (although not yet secure).
   
=> this comment suggests the function.

Regards
   
[e-mail]