[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.

Stewart

_______________________________________________
Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

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