On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, Francis Dupont wrote:
> Just a small question, why is there not an option/flag for negative
> acknowledgements in the neighbor advertisements?
> => who is supposed to send this? If the link is point-to-point then
> DAD is not issue because the link-layer (PPP) is supposed to guarantee
> no interface ID collision. If the link is not point-to-point then
> no neighbor should answer on the behalf of others.
Sorry, I should have been more specific and now I understand why
this has not been addressed. There are links, I am not sure how to
characterise them with one term, one-way shared links perhaps? These are
multicast capable but have a central point of control i.e. the base
station. Most wireless links could be modelled this way but few are in
practice. Hiperlan (/2) is one such link. Most wireless links could be made
to look like one.
In this case, negative acknowledgement, no neighbor is going to answer on
behalf of others but since the base station (Access Point) has knowledge of
all the attached hosts, it could provide a negative acknowledgement.
Aki
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
