nanog mailing list archives

Re: Android (lack of) support for DHCPv6


From: "George, Wes" <wesley.george () twcable com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 18:32:20 -0400


From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf () gmail com<mailto:ted.ietf () gmail com>>
Date: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 6:09 PM
To: "George, Wes" <wesley.george () twcable com<mailto:wesley.george () twcable com>>
Cc: Doug Barton <dougb () dougbarton us<mailto:dougb () dougbarton us>>, "nanog () nanog org<mailto:nanog () nanog 
org>" <nanog () nanog org<mailto:nanog () nanog org>>
Subject: Re: Android (lack of) support for DHCPv6


I saw your response, but creating a hypervisor-equivalent network stack inside Android didn't seem particularly easy to 
me.  This may be, however, because I've mostly dealt with OVS-style approaches in the past few years and my calibration 
is off. If you have pointers to implementations that are for mobile devices, I'd be happy to be educated.

WG] I was merely observing that bridging so that multiple virtual interfaces/devices can share the same interface and 
get their own addresses is a solved problem generically. From what I can see with KVM, it involves creating a bridge 
interface or group, and bridging both the physical interface and any virtual interfaces into it, and then standing 
back. Doesn't seem obvious to me that it requires an entire hypervisor-equivalent network stack to get this one fairly 
limited feature, and I'm not aware of any mobile implementations, but it does seem to me that its presence in Linux 
makes it something we shouldn't dismiss out of hand when exploring solutions to this problem given Android's Linux 
roots - At it's core, it's still a general–purpose computer with a set of network interfaces. I'm not an expert on 
either Android's networking stack nor Linux's, nor hypervisors, but I have a hunch if this was allowed to move through 
the existing Android feature development process, we might find some folks that are and can tell us whether this is 
doable as an alternative to DHCP–PD or SLAAC on networks that generally adhere to the one address per device rule.

Thanks
Wes

________________________________
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, 
confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the 
individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby 
notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments 
to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the 
sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.

Current thread: