You are basically arguing for DIID (duplicate interface-id detection) instead of DAD (duplicate address detection), by using DAD on the link-local address to perform DIID.
It seems strange to me to perform DAD on a link-local address that is not actually being used. For better or worse, it's not the architecture that we have today and I'm not inclined to change it. Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: Charles E. Perkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:45 AM > To: Richard Draves > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; IPng Working Group > Subject: Re: RFC 2462 DAD optimization > > > > Hello Richard, > > Even manually configured global addresses should be required > to acquire rights to the corresponding link-local address. Why not? > > Regards, > Charlie P. > > > Richard Draves wrote: > > > > I disagree. I think the problem is in the RFC 2462 > optimization. The > > RFC 2462 optimization also can fail with > manually-configured addresses > > - it's not just a problem with RFC 3041 temporary addresses. > > > > I'm curious about the implementation status. I know the Windows > > implementation does not implement the RFC 2462 optimization - it > > performs DAD on every address independently. What about other > > implementations? > > > > Rich > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Charles E. Perkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 10:03 AM > > > To: Hesham Soliman (ERA) > > > Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '; 'IPng Working Group ' > > > Subject: Re: [mobile-ip] Issue #23 and Issue #30 > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Hesham, > > > > > > "Hesham Soliman (ERA)" wrote: > > > > > > > => RFC 2462 makes an optimisation (not a good > > > > one IMHO) that if a node does DAD on link-local addresses, it > > > > 'owns the interface id' for any other address with any scope. > > > > > > I think this is a good idea. > > > > > > > RFC3041 says that a node can generate a new iid > > > > and does DAD for _that_ address which uses the > > > > new iid. Since this is typically not a link local address, you > > > > could get a conflict if the HA does not defend all addresses. > > > > > > The problem is that RFC 3041 should require any > > > such node to first acquire rights to the link-local > address. I hope > > > that is viewed as an omission, and one which can be quickly > > > repaired. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Charlie P. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
