At 12:35 PM 11/22/04 -0500, Eric A. Hall wrote:
One potentially technical hurdle here is the way that the device discovers
that a range/block of addresses is available to it. Some kind of DHCP
sub-lease, or maybe a collection of options (is it a range of addresses or
an actual subnet? how big is it, and does that include net/bcast
addresses?),is going to be required.
I think you're saying that the router/firewall/gateway thingie needs to
have some sequence like:
- initial boot or expiration of previous lease occurs
- CPE router has or forms link-local association with upstream router
(note that a non-link-local address on the upstream interface is optional)
- CPE router sends DHCP request for configuration
- upstream router replies with address of DHCP server, DNS Server, and a
prefix with a lease. It also configures itself with a local route to that
prefix via CPE router.
- CPE router configures interior interface with said prefix and starts some
combination of autoconfiguration and DHCP configuration of downstream
- If Dynamic DNS is in use, some hosts may advise the DNS server of their
new address. If there is a management contract (ISP knows about and does
something with the CPE router), supplying the router's address upstream is
one possible use of DDNS.
Note that in the case that DDNS is in use and we are triggering off lease
expiration, the process needs to take the concepts and issues of
I have added Ralph Droms to this. Ralph, your suggestion?
So it would obviously be useful that Linksys et al make sure that the
specs are there to help them continue providing the same kind of
high-value low-management experience. This is the kind of cross-industry
participation I'm talking about needing.
I'll argue that this is pretty much what the IETF has always done. It comes
down to "someone who sees the need propose a solution and make sure the
other folks who are likely to be interested buy into it". It is fundamental
to what we do.
Ietf mailing list