Once we get a bit for there I’ll send it over. It’s not my idea, I’m a contributor so I’ll need to ask first. On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 6:56 PM Dave Taht wrote: > > > On May 17, 2021, at 2:02 PM, Nick Buraglio wrote: > > The issue with this methodology (which I have used myself) is that it > relies on the host stack to do the heavy lifting. > > > Ah, we are talking about two slightly > different things. > > I was unhappy with relying on happy eyeballs for failover in the clients, > but withdrawing the address that were not working did not work well with > any clients we had at time. > > May I have a peek at your draft? > > Our draft handles most, if not all of this at the CPE, > > > It would be cool to implement something better at the cpe. > > which will allow for a significant amount of flexibility and reduction of > complexity at the host layer. That is a fairly large oversight in the > operational model for 90% of v6 users that aren't running BGP. One goal we > have is to reduce the time to connectivity failover and make deterministic > IPv6 paths easily implemented by non-technical folks, and to create a > standard for all CPE to implement with as minimal CPU as possible. > > nb > > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 2:59 PM Dave Taht wrote: > >> On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 12:48 PM Nick Buraglio wrote: >> > >> > I have this working now between my providers with straight routing and >> gateway checking, but it’s pretty easily doable other ways with platforms >> like routerOS or pfsense. >> > FWIW, I’m working with some others on an IETF draft proposal that will >> hopefully solve the plaguing problem of multiple IPv6 PD or otherwise >> provider assigned address blocks that will make a lot of that easier, too. >> >> Hmm? We solved this long ago in cerowrt, openwrt, and in linux, by >> using "source specific routing", which is the default for many openwrt >> derived OSes. >> >> Basically it looks like this: >> >> ip route add from 2001:abcd::/56 via whatever >> ip route add from 2001:dbcd::/56 via whatever2 >> >> You then distribute both sets of ipv6 addresses to the clients. Simple >> clean and it solved the bcp38 problem because there is no >> default route for any but these ipv6 addresses in the system. It works >> well for vpns also. >> >> Happy eyeballs takes care of the rest. >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-babel-source-specific-08 >> describes how we added it to the babel routing protocol >> as well, so best hops can be easily chosen in a more complex network. >> In case I had 5+ comcast uplinks spread across a wifi campus so having >> multiple uplinks and failover was needed. It's been up and running >> for... 7 years? >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source-specific_routing also made it >> into a few other places. >> >> I'm pretty certain every other OS completely missed this key feature >> of course including your mikrotik >> >> >> >> >> > >> > nb >> > >> > >> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 2:36 PM David Lang wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, 17 May 2021, Nick Buraglio wrote: >> >> >> >> > Inline >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 2:15 PM Dave Taht >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Starlink provides a router, also? I'm so confused. I thought the >> dishy >> >> >> was all there was. Care to tear it apart and describe what's in it? >> >> > >> >> > As far as the "router" is concerned, it's very much a consumer grade >> >> > device that is managed via the mobile app. I hated it, so I took it >> >> > out. It's still up in the attic. near the cable conduit, if I recall. >> >> >> >> Fantastic, I was hoping it would be something like this. I think this >> opens up a >> >> lot of more useful options (including more easily doing failover >> between the >> >> dish and other network options) >> >> >> >> David Lang >> >> >> >> -- >> Latest Podcast: >> https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6791014284936785920/ >> >> Dave Täht CTO, TekLibre, LLC >> > _______________________________________________ > > > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink > > >