Re: [Softwires] Provisioning Hub-and-spoke in MAP - How?

Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com> Tue, 10 April 2012 11:52 UTC

Return-Path: <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: softwires@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A7D21F85AA for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_35=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6AGr5Jlv-CHD for <softwires@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-f44.google.com (mail-bk0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79A6921F85A8 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bkuw5 with SMTP id w5so4507571bku.31 for <softwires@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-tagtoolbar-keys:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=91/qBEpbEO+suShhBR7umW6ZZLGsyrca5YjCchFJB1M=; b=t/x8hOMB4vBcDMk1ApkGLO59r/SAhSVzGzZtak1JQGSM4f2omMq+uSu50aM3+yAbg/ 798is3/2p/as1U3jLSPyWzQLCU1G+r0IT+Ezf0NS8DXHyAFopYAh6nrt43ZQ67uM0hzm ALMpNJwkvnpGpJLZ0/0xiqqKJLIOErAq5zDNRHWSG+IIktPrA/dH+dQARN4v+HQHk2zQ VQthtLSCk6TxKcFV4bah8QF2PVGOt1RI+SeL0usQqrTAFZ+iyaI89/B4/FfwF7/cBWGj XzIXc77Nfjz0cTaj/mt2YVkcO5cJspmW7tEk2JH3WH4Z+uvEpVjJGBdtGiO+qrEGsvfz 2mag==
Received: by 10.205.139.20 with SMTP id iu20mr4302250bkc.93.1334058759605; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.100] (host-109-107-11-157.ip.jarsat.pl. [109.107.11.157]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id zx16sm35645998bkb.13.2012.04.10.04.52.38 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Apr 2012 04:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4F841F00.1050506@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:52:32 +0200
From: Tomek Mrugalski <tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120310 Thunderbird/11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: softwires@ietf.org
References: <B3BD62F0-364C-4BCA-B1CF-5F103388471B@cisco.com> <87158690-27BE-4777-B70E-5991DEDEA78C@laposte.net> <CAFFjW4jAzOVbGQCQy+TyqA6V1c2ca3BN9yMrCu3fbQgcAfMBkg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFFjW4jAzOVbGQCQy+TyqA6V1c2ca3BN9yMrCu3fbQgcAfMBkg@mail.gmail.com>
X-TagToolbar-Keys: D20120410135232448
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Softwires] Provisioning Hub-and-spoke in MAP - How?
X-BeenThere: softwires@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: softwires wg discussion list <softwires.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/softwires>
List-Post: <mailto:softwires@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires>, <mailto:softwires-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:52:41 -0000

On 10.04.2012 11:51, Wojciech Dec wrote:
> you're apparently confusing matters. There is no need to have a DHCPv6
> option, or a million node deployment to test MAP implementations.
> DS-lite is a good example, with implementations and standards track
> before the DHCPv6 option.

> On 10 April 2012 11:37, Rémi Després <despres.remi@laposte.net
> <mailto:despres.remi@laposte.net>> wrote:
>     The difficulty is that:
>     - The MAP-DHCPv6 draft has no parameter to indicate whether the
>     ISP-chosen topology is mesh or hub-and-spoke.
Guys,
Please be reasonable. DHCP provisioning is trivial compared to other
MAP/4rd-U aspects. It is not relevant for core aspects of the technology
comparisons. My advice to people who spend their time on "my solution is
better than yours" discussions: Forget about DHCP for now and focus on
more important aspects.

My personal opinion is that DHCP does not matter at this stage. Sure, it
will be needed eventually, but you can *now* test implementations that
are statically configured.

Now, to the actual question about hub&spoke. We assumed that CE can
detect on its own if it is running in hub&spoke or mesh topology by
analyzing received rules. See last paragraph of section 4.2 of
mdt-softwire-map-dhcp-option that explain this simple algorithm (if it
can be called an algorithm at all - it is a simple "if" statement).

Honestly speaking as a co-author of MAP DHCP option draft, I didn't want
to spend too much time on this *yet*. That is also one of the reasons
why I didn't look at 4rd-U DHCP option yet. It changes too greatly
between revisions.

Cheers,
Tomek