----- Original Message ----
> From: "Laganier, Julien" <julienl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@xxxxxxxxx>; Hesham Soliman
><hesham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; mext <mext@xxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Fri, September 10, 2010 11:57:36 AM
> Subject: Re: [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-pd (DHCPv6 Prefix
>Delegation for NEMO) to Proposed Standard
>
> Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
> >
> > Le 10/09/2010 11:58, Hesham Soliman a écrit :
> > >
> > > On 10/09/10 7:55 PM, "Alexandru
> > > Petrescu"<alexandru.petrescu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Le 10/09/2010 11:48, Hesham Soliman a écrit :
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> => Who cares, specify it in your product description. The
> > >>>>> IETF doesn't specify how to build products.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hmm... to me it is a very IETF sensitive issue the Router vs
> > >>>> Host. For example, an ND spec says distinctively what a Host
> > >>>> and what a Router does, e.g. a Host does not respond to Router
> > >>>> Solicitation.
> > >>>
> > >>> => Yes and it does so on a per-interface basis, not on a
> > >>> per-machine basis.
> > >>
> > >> Yes, and the Mobile Router is a Router on its egress interface
> > >> when connected at home, as per spec. It is that interface that
> > >> needs a default route automatically configured.
> > >
> > > => Ok, so you're happy with it being half host half router when it's
> > > away from home?
> >
> > When it is away from home it is fully a Host on the egress interface.
> > When at home fully Router on same. I am happy with it this way.
> >
> > > If so then let it do the same at home. Otherwise, I don't know how
> > > you want to fix this in this WG.
> >
> > It would mean to specify it to be a at home, be first a Host (get
> > default route) then change and become a Router, but still at home.
> >
> > This behaviour could be set in the DHCPv6-PD-NEMO draft, being under
> > discussion now.
>
> This is a non issue for this draft. This is not specific to NEMO but generic
>to any DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation setup where the requesting router needs to
>configures an address on its north side. It can do so as per the deployment
>specifics, including, but not limited to, acting as a host on the north
>interface and as a router on south interfaces -- please remember that Neighbor
>Discovery is specified on a per-interface basis.
>
> [ I also note that this draft has been more than 2 years in the MEXT working
>group in which you are participating, which gave you ample time to comment on
>this and other things... ]
>
Julien: Alex, myself, possibly others have been raising issues with this draft
since long time.
It is not new.
Regards,
behcet
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf