From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 24 06:38:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04A0816A4DD; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:38:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from gaia.nimnet.asn.au (nimbin.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.45.143]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A910543D45; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:38:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Received: from localhost (smithi@localhost) by gaia.nimnet.asn.au (8.8.8/8.8.8R1.4) with SMTP id QAA14631; Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:38:05 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from smithi@nimnet.asn.au) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:38:05 +1000 (EST) From: Ian Smith To: Pat Lashley In-Reply-To: <23D2619F6BACE4E728178EE5@garrett.local> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Doug Barton , Fredrik Lindberg Subject: Re: Zeroconfig and Multicast DNS X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:38:32 -0000 I've been watching this thread with great interest, having recently been introduced to the possibilities of OLSR (net/olsrd) for local (and beyond) P2P wi-mesh networks, and wondering if/how zeroconf fits in. Some refs: My discovery point, a great (online) book found from a review by Geoff Huston in the Internet Protocol Journal Vol 9 No 2, p44: Wireless Networking in the Developing World: http://wndw.net/ OLSR.ORG: http://www.olsr.org/ RFC: http://ietf.org/rfc/rfc3626.txt (basis, though olsrd extends this) Host addresses in such a MANET appear to require manual allocation so far, usually in RFC1918 ranges, but the notion of zeroconfig-joining such a network seems perhaps worthy of exploration? Am I way off base here, thinking some matchmaking might be useful? Cheers, Ian On Wed, 23 Aug 2006, Pat Lashley wrote: [..] > Hmmm. Interesting routing problem. Basically, we need to prefer a route that > doesn't use the LLA (unless the destination is in an LLA); but still handle the > edge cases like having the default route be through an LLA-only-connected > router. (Which MUST do NAT...) > We also need to keep an eye towards dynamic roaming. One scenario is a campus > composed of multiple Link Local zones and WiFi. As you move around the campus > with your (running) laptop, it will have to re-negotiate/defend its LLA; and > may need to obtain a different one. The address of the default router is also > likely to change as it moves from one zone to another. > Of course, in that scenario it doesn't matter whether you have any non-LLA IP > addresses; since you won't be using them. BUT if you add in a mix of non-LLA > addresses advertised as servers; the routing adjustments could become quite > interesting... > > Some of the problems raised by roaming scenaria need not be addressed > immediately; but we do need to keep them in mind during the design phase to > ensure that our solution to the basic LLA/mDNS issues doesn't make the roaming > issues even harder to handle.