Re: RFC 5006 status

[Philip Homburg <pch-v6ops@u-1.phicoh.com>]

In your letter dated Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:49:08 +0000 you wrote:
>On 18/03/2010 15:02, Philip Homburg wrote:
>> But I'm not sure why you would want a user land rtsol. 
>[...]
>> So I'm wondering how smart it is to have part of this processing in user spa
>ce.
>> 
>> My person reason for putting it in the kernel is to start DUD as soon as
>> possible.
>
>wut?  How are you supposed to easily write /etc/resolv.conf from kernel-land?
>
>rtsol belongs in userland, and the more complicated it becomes, the
>stronger the reason to have it there.  If you need to interact with a
>kernel from userland, you can easily define careful interfaces to do so.

I'm talking about real RAs, the ones with information about routers, prefixes,
and stuff like that.

I want that as soon as possible. And all of that stuff needs to be in the
kernel anyhow. Moving RA processing to user land just makes things more
difficult.

Problems start when you start mixing that with information that belongs in
/etc/resolv.conf.

The easy way out is to just issue another series of router solicitations from
user land. 

I think nobody yet remarked in this thread that RAs tend to be periodic
whereas DHCP is not. So you end up broadcasting (officially multicasting,
but everybody gets it anyhow) the same DNS entries over and over again.