> From: Robert Elz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> The Yokohama meeting room's opinion was that "just DAD on every
> address before assigning it" was the way to go.
But, in my honest opinion, that decision is wrong. Doing DAD on every
address is in all respects more costly
- implementation requires more complex code
- it causes more packets on the link
It should be remembered that I do not disallow configuring
node A: address P1::id1
node B: address P2::id1
as long as "id1" is not configured as "autoconfigure id" to be
combined with prefixes that have A=1. So, I'm kind of wondering what
functionality is actually missing?
I would propose following rules instead of do DAD on every address:
- if id is used in autoconfigre (combine with prefix that has A=1),
then doing DAD on "fe80::id" is sufficient
- if id is not used in autoconfigure, it's actually part of full
configured address "prefix::id", then do DAD on "prefix::id".
- on receiving DAD on any X::id, there are couple of choices
a) declare collision if "id" matches my id that is used in
autoconfiguration
b) declare collision if (a) AND "x::" is a prefix with A=1.
Hoever, it is obvious that (b) is very weak, as RA for X::/64 may come
later...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
