Re: [DNA] Issue 2: What if no prefix is advertised?

[Sathya Narayanan <sathya@research.panasonic.com>]

If we are going to mandate that the router advertise one prefix even
when stateful autoconfiguration is used and that it must be the smallest
prefix, we are implicitly requiring the adminstrator to configure each
of these routers with this information, right? Or, are we talking about
the routers sniffing DHCP messages - What does it mean?

I am leaving this open for now, until I hear comments on this question.

- Sathya

JinHyeock Choi wrote:

>> Issue: If stateful autoconfiguration is used, the routers may not
>> advertise any prefix in its RA message. DNA will not work without prefix
>> advertised. Current text relies on DHCP confirm message exchange for DNA
>> in that case.
>>
>> Agreement at the meeting: Lets mandate the inclusion of one prefix in
>> all RA message, with L= 0 and A=0. But, atleast one prefix is a MUST.
>> The router MUST include the smallest prefix either in PIO or LPO of all
>> RA messages.
>> Note: I am not refering to the smallest prefix as "LinkID" because in
>> "Issue 6", I will be proposing the removal of the concept of LinkIDs.
>> The forward compatibility advantage of the LinkIDs can be easily
>> supported and refer to the email on Issue 6 is further details.
>>
>> If you have any objections to the proposed change please post your
>> objections on the list.
>
>
> I agree and, IMO, the concept of 'LinkID' is of help. It would be
> simpler to mandate to include LinkID prefix.
>
> Best Regards
>
> JinHyeock