> From: Markku Savela [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > From: "Brian Zill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > My take: given that it appears the majority of > > implementations currently do "DAD", and that "DAD" > > provides for a cleaner multi-link subnet architecture, > > I think "DAD" is the better choice. > > Umm.. "majority of implementations"? What is this? How do you > count them? When was this tally performed.
I just went by the ones I know about. Judging from the messages on this thread, there are only one or two implementations doing "DIID". Note that I said "it appears", I didn't claim to have conducted an exhaustive poll. > Does each separate implementation count as one? Or, does the > number of nodes running the implementation affect the count? > Or some other weighing algorithm? Well, I had just been considering each separate implementation. Weighing them by existing node count would shift things even more clearly in the "DAD" direction since both KAME and us do "DAD". --Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
