Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Current state of ipv6 in openwrt barrier breaker

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:47 AM, Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org> wrote:
> Hi Ole,
>
>> you could use hierarchical PD, just that it doesn't work well with:
>>   - networks with loops
>>   - multi-homed networks
>>
>> and it is quite wasteful with regards to subnet space.
>> ND proxy fails in any topology with a loop.
>
> Yes but I expect loops not to happen in practice or people that build loops
> to know how to take care of them.

I expect loops to happen a lot in practice, and people to not be able
to take care of them.

Babel, however, is loop free.

http://www.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr/~jch/software/babel/

>
> Nevertheless taking into account the issues I mention below hierarchical PD
> still sounds to me like a better thing in SOHO environments regarding
> interoperability with other devices in that environment however as I still
> need the NDP-Proxying fallback in case the upstream router (be it a
> SOHO-router) doesn't support further distribution of the ISP-Prefix.
>
>
>
>> we do have an implementation on github that implements
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arkko-homenet-prefix-assignment/
>> that supports prefix assignment with an arbitrary topology in the network.
>> why not use that?

I would like to implement portions of that algorithm in something far
more lightweight than OSPF. Extending AHCP is my current first choice.

> From a technical point of view I like your approach and using OSPF.
>
> However the stuff is >1 MB in size including all of its dependencies and
> includes some strange dependencies like libreadline?, some otherwise
> unrelated Lua extensions and so on.
>
> Sorry, that is not an option for the majority of OpenWrt users, just for
> having a more versatile Prefix Delegation feature which will only be (?)
> interoperable with a small amount of routers.
>
> We could integrate it for more powerful routers though (and I wouldn't
> object) but I don't see any hope to get it to mainstream before we can get
> it down to a few 100 KB (including dependencies).
> Also at least I don't have any time or resources to take care of either of
> that in the near future.

Neither do I.

>



-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html