[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: thoughts on draft-bryant-shand-ipfrr-notvia-addresses-00.txt

Subject: Re: thoughts on draft-bryant-shand-ipfrr-notvia-addresses-00.txt
From: Stewart Bryant
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:14:25 +0100
I believe that it is important to consider a dynamic/automatic way of assigning addresses - and at the very least, it is needed to have a mechanism so that the same IP address means the same thing consistently! If we don't have the latter, it'll be a bit of a nightmare to troubleshoot.

I certainly agree with the last part of your statement but
not the first part. Manual assignment of ip addresses is
something that is being done from day one and I don't
believe we have any strong need to make it dynamic. Of
course, a dynamic assignment method that will be consistent
across re-starts and predictable in its results is always
a plus we can think of but at the current stage of ipfrr
I don't see it as a must.

Consistency is the primary concern. The next is simplicity of configuration, trouble-shooting and operation. Manual assignment of addresses to interfaces could be good enough; perhaps the options are just implementation differences as to how the router derives a particular notvia address to use per interface.
I think so. Whilst I think that we need a manual address assignment
mode, I am sure that we will also need a block assignment mode.
The config should then try hard to allocate the same address across
reboots, but I do not think that it needs to be perfect. Any tool
that needs to know which address was allocated to which interface
could look in the link state DB.


Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>