Re: [DNA] Issue 6: DNAHostLinkIDList

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

Hi Sathya,

If there's no configured prefix on that interface of the router, it
shouldn't advertise prefixes (unless it learns one through Router
Discovery).

In that case it will not route to or from a non-link local prefix either.
Then it's not a problem as there's no prefix on link.

Advertising no prefixes (as complete) is the same as advertising the host's
existing prefixes are invalid, and provides strong link-change detection.

Completeness could be determined in the same way as usual (by solicitation),
and this issue can be avoided if any of the routers advertises a prefix,
as I indicated.

Greg

----- Original Message -----
From: Sathya Narayanan <sathya@research.panasonic.com>
Date: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 2:30 am
Subject: Re: [DNA] Issue 6: DNAHostLinkIDList
To: JinHyeock Choi <jinchoe@gmail.com>
Cc: Dna <dna@eng.monash.edu.au>

> JinHyeock  -
> 
> You are right. I didn't realize that before. Thanks for correcting 
> me. I
> feel a lot more comfortable now.
> 
> Now, is it ok the REQUIRE the sysadmin to configure the routers with
> atleast one prefix even if stateful address configuration is used. I
> guess it is ok. I don't know what others think.
> 
> Greg -
> 
> Your idea to use the configured non-link local prefix is a good 
> one, but
> it still leaves the scenario where the router is configured only with
> link-local addresses on it local interface. AFAIK, thats going to 
> be the
> most common scenario. So, if we require the routers to advertise 
> atleastone prefix, it MUST be configured on the router even when 
> statefuladdress configuration is used.
> 
> Sathya
> 
> > Dear Sathya
> >
> > Thanks for your trouble advancing the work.
> >
> >> I still haven't closed Issue 2:, changes to support Stateful
> >> autoconfiguration scenario. The current text depends on DHCP 
> CONFIRM to
> >> address this scenario. I am still uncomfortable requiring 
> configuration>> of each router on the link with the smallest prefix 
> - a sysadmin then
> >> becomes responsible for keeping track of the smallest prefix and
> >> updating the configuration each time.
> >
> >
> > Sysamin doesn't have to keep track of the smallest prefix and
> > configure it to each router manually.
> >
> > Sysamin only have to configure a router to advertise at least one
> > prefix. Then, after a while, the routers on the same link, upon
> > hearing the prefixes from each other, will pick the smallest prefix
> > and advertise it in either PIO or LPIO.
> >
> > Thanks for your kind consideration.
> >
> > Best Regards
> >
> > JinHyeock
> 
> 
>