1 / 6

DHC Load Balancing Algorithm for DHCPv6

DHC Load Balancing Algorithm for DHCPv6. draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-load-balancing-01 IETF 89, London, March 2014 Andre Kostur Presented by Bernie Volz. Status. Originally proposed as an Individual draft in Oct 2012 Adopted as a WG item after 3 more drafts in Nov 2012 Passed WGLC in Feb 2013

howe
Download Presentation

DHC Load Balancing Algorithm for DHCPv6

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DHC Load Balancing Algorithm for DHCPv6 draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-load-balancing-01 IETF 89, London, March 2014 Andre KosturPresented by Bernie Volz

  2. Status • Originally proposed as an Individual draft in Oct 2012 • Adopted as a WG item after 3 more drafts in Nov 2012 • Passed WGLC in Feb 2013 • Comments made by the document shepherd, and I let the ball drop • Reviving the draft with an -01 publication in Feb 2014

  3. Quick Summary • Take RFC 3074 and apply it to DHCPv6 • Use the DUID instead of MAC Address for input to the hashing algorithm • There was a suggestion to change the hash from Pearson to FNV1a. Further analysis showed that Pearson outperformed FNV1a both in a more even distribution, and cheaper computationally. Thus we stay with Pearson.

  4. Changes from -00 • More explicit handling cases for each message type • Expanded Leasequery handling • Notes on how Load Balancing fits with Failover, and how Load Balancing is not Failover • Added Triggered Reconfiguration (RFC 6977) since is has been published in the meantime

  5. Open Issues • No remaining open issues

  6. Next Steps • Since there has been no comment since publishing the -01 draft, I would ask to move this to another WGLC. • We also need 5 volunteers to review the document (beyond the normal “I support” declaration)

More Related