On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:57 AM, Jonathan Hui wrote:
On Nov 9, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
Again, entirely getting rid of a function is always the best
optimization.
Can we do that for DAD?
The *need* for DAD is the core question for me. As specified within
6lowpan-nd now, IPv6 addresses are maintained using a centralized
protocol. That protocol looks and smells like DHCP - there's
request/response, lease times, relays. The whiteboard may also
administratively assign addresses. So in the end, it's not clear to
me why we would need to *detect* duplicates when we essentially
*avoid* them from the beginning.
I've voiced my comment several times over the past 1+ years and
presented a draft that argues for the use of optimized DHCP in
Dublin, so this is not new from my end. The fact that the current
6lowpan-nd document has evolved towards using DHCP-like mechanisms
is not an accident. But if what we do is DHCP-like, it would seem
to make sense to utilize existing DHCP infrastructure rather than
defining something new.
This is frustrating, I was about to write the exact same email. I
cannot agree more.
Why can't we use and potentially extended DHCP for that purpose ?
thanks.
JP.
--
Jonathan Hui
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
