Re: AsiaBSDCon 2014 P7B: Implementation and Modification for CPE Routers: Filter Rule Scan Optimization, IPsec Interface and Ethernet Switch

[Roy Marples <roy%marples.name@localhost>]

On 20/03/2014 3:28, Hikaru Abe wrote:
> > Is there any reason you can't or won't use dhcpcd(8)?
> > I'm always interested in feedback to make dhcpcd the best solution.
>
> It seems to be almost good for our routers. we would choose dhcpcd(8)
> for DHCPv6 if it exist in early 2000s. :)
> I'm not sure about details of dhcpcd. But i think there are some
> differences between our implementation.
>
> Our daemon do/is:
> - Install black hole route (RTF_REJECT) to delegated prefix by
> default. It prevent ping-pong packet between ISP and CPE for unknown
> addresses are not in configured sla-ids.

Nice idea. I added support for this in dhcpcd here:
http://roy.marples.name/projects/dhcpcd/ci/ed3cccf86e?sbs=0

> - IPV6CP-aware, like as ethernet link state, especially PPPoE.

Could you describe this a little more?
dhcpcd isn't a PPPoE client but monitors link state quite happily and 
reacts accordingly

> - Tightly coupled with DHCPv6 server. Some customer network requires
> redistribution of DHCPv6 options from WAN to LAN side, such as SNTP,
> DNS servers, sub prefix-delegation through PD client.

Well, that is outside of the scope for dhcpcd.
Still, it can be done using current dhcpcd hooks to configure the DHCPv6 
server.

> - DHCPv6 relay.

Outside the scope of dhcpcd.

Thanks

Roy