> A non-zero probability of > collision requires a mechanism to resolve duplicates, and DAD is the > currently defined one. If another one exists that makes more > sense over > a lossy air-link, we should consider replacing DAD because it will > probably be more reliable in the general case as well.
No need to replace DAD but just allow it to be disabled on some links. The previous discussion with Francis seemed to point to the issue that PPP links where some form of prefix delegation occurs can do without DADs. As commented already, RFC3041 would work. Regards, /Karim -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
