dhcpcd-discuss

> --- Begin Message ---
> During my quick talk on Wednesday, I mentioned that I had been pleasantly
> surprised at the very clean interaction between the protocols:
>
>   - HNCP redistributes assigned prefixes into the routing protocol;
>   - HNCP redistributes assigned prefixes into the RA and DHCPv4 servers;
>   - the routing protocol redistributes the default route into RA and DHCPv4.
>
> That's very elegant -- unless I've missed something, there are no other
> cross-protocol interactions in the subset of the Homenet stack that is
> implemented in shncpd.
>
> Redistribution into RA happens pretty smoothly (I'm testing against dhcpcd,
> the most complete DHCPv4/RA/DHCPv6 client I could find).  The main
> desirable feature of RA is that it is possible to switch between being
> a default router and not being one dynamically, just by sending a new RA
> with a zero/non-zero default router lifetime.
>
> Renumbering is not as smooth -- it appears to be impossible to remove
> a set of addresses wholesale, retracting a set of PIOs merely causes the
> old addresses to become deprecated.  Since after a renumbering event we're
> no longer routing towards the retracted prefix, the client will need to
> timeout its TCP connections, and any UDP applications will need to rebind
> to the non-deprecated addresses (please check your NTP and BitTorrent clients).
>
> The situation with DHCPv4 is not as satisfactory.  It is not possible to
> force the clients to either pick a different default router or to renew
> their lease (FORCERENEW is not useful).  This means that DHCPv4 clients
> will be stuck with a non-functional address until they choose to renew.
> As Markus explained to me, this is mitigated by three factors:
>
>   1. since IPv4 addresses are NATed, IPv4 renumbering is not likely to
>      happen;
>
>   2. since DHCPv4 is not a very noisy protocol, we can use very low
>      renewal times;
>
>   3. Windows users have already been trained to reboot when something
>      doesn't work as expected.
>
> I know there are DHCP and 6man/6ops people on this mailing list, any
> opinions on whether we're doing it wrong and whether updates to RA/DHCPv4
> are desirable?
>
> -- Juliusz
>
> _______________________________________________
> homenet mailing list
> homenet@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
>
> --- End Message ---