Re: [DNA] Prefix information for link identification in DNA

[Brett Pentland <brett.pentland@eng.monash.edu.au>]

Bernard Aboba wrote:
>> He thought that it is questionable to assume that:
>>
>>    1) Every network has a router.
>>    2) you can name a network using one of its prefixes.
> 
> There are certainly adhoc networks in which there is no router.   
> However, detecting attachment to such a network is quite difficult, 
> because nodes may join and leave and therefore there is no L3 
> invariant.  That is why the DNAv4 reachability test cannot be used to 
> detect attachment to adhoc networks, but rather adhoc attachment is 
> concluded after failiure of all other approaches (reachability test, 
> DHCPv4, etc.)

OK.

> I would also agree that there are situations in which a network cannot 
> be named using one of its prefixes.  In DNAv4, a private network is not 
> suitable for identification because it is not unique.

DNAv6 might have another option.  What do you think of requiring
the router(s) on such a link to configure a ULA prefix?  The prefix
need not necessarily be advertised in a PIO in an RA, but could be
used for link identification.

Brett.