Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
While it is true that IPv6 allows multiple subnets per link and has no
requirement about all nodes being aware of all prefixes, it is intended
for routers on a link supporting multiple prefixes. So, the number of
prefixes that you would actually see on a link in practice would be much
more limited than the number of prefixes you are likely to have with the
prefix-per-MN case.
This does work fine for point-to-point links such as cellular links, but
for the general broadcast media, it is rather strange. It seems to me
that taking broadcast/multicast capability away from a medium that
natively supports the functionality is placing a serious limitation on
such links. I don't know if it specifically breaks something w.r.t IPv6,
but it definitely takes away some powerful functionality.
If the wireless media is natively point-to-point then there is no
necessity to make it multicast capable.
To me this is the thing to be addressed, the netlmm wireless link nature.
Also, if, keeping inline with the charter goals, we still maintain that
the MN does not require any changes, this means that an MN, on WLAN or
ethernet or such media, will assume it is on a shared link and attempt
to do DAD
Not sure that the charter assumes MN being on a shared link. I think it
makes no assumptions of being on a shared link or on a point-to-point
link. It think it should, or maybe in the reqs/ps drafts.
Alex
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
