Re: [DNA] Question regarding prefix assignment

[Greg Daley <Greg.Daley@eng.monash.edu.au>]

----- Original Message -----
From: Brett Pentland <Brett.Pentland@eng.monash.edu.au>
Date: Wednesday, March 9, 2005 2:39 am
Subject: Re: [DNA] Question regarding prefix assignment


> > I believe this scenario *could* be possible but I'm not sure any 
> sane> administrator would do this. If X is a vlan switch and the 
> switch allows
> > vlan tags to be switched to multiple ports, then you could have a 
> scenario> such as
> > 
> > vlan x = prefix A
> > vlan y = prefix B
> > 
> > and
> > 
> > vlan x switched to AP2 and AP1
> > vlan y switched to AP1 (thus only AP1 gets RAs for prefix B)
> > 
> > The only reason I can think of why anyone would do this is if 
> there is some
> > administrative reason why only AP1 should see prefix B. Perhaps 
> this would
> > be a restricted prefix that equates to an SSID for a 'top secret' 
> meeting> room.
> 
> I think that in this case, we would detect attachment to the VLANs. 
> If
> we attach to AP2, vlan x, we receive prefix A.  If we move to AP1, 
> vlanx, we see prefix A, and should through some means decide that 
> we have 
> not moved (logically) and our configuration is still valid.
> 
> If we move to AP1, vlan y, we see prefix B and through some means 
> should 
> decide that we have moved and need to reconfigure.
> 
> If we move to AP1 and can receive packets from both vlans x and y 
> at the 
> same time, then things get messy.  If we can abstract connections 
> to 
> vlans as virtual interfaces, then we can probably treat them 
> separately 
> and apply DNA on a per-virtual-interface basis.  If not, then I'm 
> not 
> sure how best to deal with the situation.
> 
> Any thoughts?

Logical tunnel interfaces or connection identifiers
are fairly common.

Greg
> Brett.
>