On Sep 8, 2010, at 7:58 AM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > I agree mainly with the document draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd. > > It is good and needed to dynamically assign a Mobile Network Prefix to > the NEMO-enabled Mobile Router. > > However, here are a couple of missing points. > > One missing point is about how will the Mobile Router configure its > default route on the home link? I thought Prefix Delegation would bring > DHCP in the picture and would allow MR to synthesize a default route > even though RAs are absent. But I now realize that a DHCPv6-PD > implementation (and std?) does not allow a router (MR) to synthesize its > default route (neither RA does, nor DHCPv6-nonPD does). => Am not sure I understand from your comment where the problem really lies. If neither RA does the job nor DHCPv6 then why do you think this problem (if it is really a problem) should be adressed in this particular draft and not in a more general way? Wassim H. > Another missing point is that this spec talks _only_ one specific case > where DHCPv6-PD is used _without_ a real Relay: the MR is Client and > Relay and the HA is the Server DR. My deployment is different: the MR > is not the Relay, just Client; and the Server DR is not HA. For this to > work there are some modifications needed on the DHCPv6 Relay > implementation and std (manage the the allocated prefix in the Relay's > routing table). > > I believe this model of deploying DHCPv6-PD (HA is not Server, Client is > not Relay) is inline with existing DHCPv4 deployments and that gives > an easy v6 migration path. > > There are several ways of addressing these two missing points. > > Alex > > > Le 07/09/2010 17:36, The IESG a écrit : >> The IESG has received a request from the Mobility EXTensions for >> IPv6 WG (mext) to consider the following document: >> >> - 'DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for NEMO ' >> <draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd-06.txt> as a Proposed Standard >> >> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits >> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to >> the ietf@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2010-09-21. Exceptionally, >> comments may be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please >> retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. >> >> The file can be obtained via >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd-06.txt >> >> >> IESG discussion can be tracked via >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=17328&rfc_flag=0 >> >> >> > No IPR declarations were found that appear related to this I-D. >> _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce >> mailing list IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf Regards, Wassim H.
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf