Re: [v6ops] Flash renumbering

[Philip Homburg <[e-mail]>]

> > I'm not sure if this is guaranteed to fail. But if it does, it would create 
> a
> > nice market demand for homenet.
> 
> not sure what point you are trying to make.  it's a fact that unless
> you have protocol protections in place, it is possible to make
> loops in networks with more than one device.

I'm saying that it not clear what effect a loop will have on DHCP PD.

> > There is no homenet for IPv4, nor do consumer ethernet switches run SPF by
> > default, so it seems that this may not be such a big issue.
> 
> homenet supports both v4 and v6.

I tried to say that without homenet, existing IPv4 networks are fine.

It could be that people quickly manage to remove the link that causes the loop
or that the impact of a loop is not as serious as portrayed.

> > Do phones receive a suitably large prefix these days to number the local
> > networks. Last thing I knew was that phone companies didn't want to do
> > DHCP PD for some reason.
> 
> I think this is a somewhat disingenuous way to argue.  The question
> was "Does homenet really solve the phone problem I described?".

If the homenet answer to the question 'how does a phone reach a 
disconnected local network' is that the phone has to become the uplink of the 
network, then I can see plenty of people trying to work around that.