Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters

Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> Mon, 14 November 2011 10:36 UTC

Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 11:36:31 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@cesnet.cz>
Message-ID: <20111114103631.GA17767@elstar.local>
Mail-Followup-To: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@cesnet.cz>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, netmod@ietf.org
References: <20111114.093601.320467224258500807.mbj@tail-f.com> <20111114091433.GA17181@elstar.local> <D052699D-0DFE-413B-A40C-7CC4EB710DCB@cesnet.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <D052699D-0DFE-413B-A40C-7CC4EB710DCB@cesnet.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 06:14:32PM +0800, Ladislav Lhotka wrote:
> 
> On Nov 14, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 09:36:01AM +0100, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> Here are two issues for the draft-ietf-netmod-ip-cfg document.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> RFC 4862 (IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration) states:
> >> 
> >>   A node MUST allow the following autoconfiguration-related variable to
> >>   be configured by system management for each multicast-capable
> >>   interface:
> >> 
> >>     DupAddrDetectTransmits
> >> 
> >> Should we add this leaf to our data model?
> > 
> > If RFC 4862 says so...
> > 
> >> RFC 4861 (Neighbor Discovery in IPv6) states:
> >> 
> >>   A router MUST allow for the following conceptual variables to be
> >>   configured by system management.
> >> 
> >>     <list of a handful of config params>
> >> 
> >> Should we add these variables to our data model, conditional on an
> >> if-feature?    They are present in the IP-MIB.
> > 
> > The question here is what is in scope of this work and what is out of
> > scope. Are we limiting this data model to the configuration of
> > interfaces or do we include things happening on routers, like the
> > configuration of routing advertisements. In fact, if we take a broad
> > definition of the scope, we will have to work through
> > 
> > draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-11.txt
> > 
> > and all the mandatory stuff it references. And also 4941 comes into my
> > mind and there is ongoing work on source address selection and even
> > discussion today how to handle situations where you get potentially
> > conflicting information via RAs and DHCP. Since it is unlikely that we
> > will be successful covering everything configurable in the IP layer,
> > we should in my view have a plan how to put things into manageable
> > pieces.
> 
> Yes, that's why I don't want to have an ietf-ipv6-unicast-routing
> module as a part of the routing-cfg draft.

I am not sure I can follow you. What would ietf-ipv6-unicast-routing
cover? What do you have in mind?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

[netmod] ipv6 config parameters Martin Bjorklund
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Ladislav Lhotka
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Juergen Schoenwaelder
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Martin Bjorklund
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Juergen Schoenwaelder
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Ladislav Lhotka
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Ladislav Lhotka
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Juergen Schoenwaelder
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Ladislav Lhotka
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Juergen Schoenwaelder
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Martin Bjorklund
Re: [netmod] ipv6 config parameters Ladislav Lhotka