Nick, 100% agree.
/jim -----Original Message----- From: Nick 'Sharkey' Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 6:24 PM To: Bound, Jim Cc: Tony Hain; Charles E. Perkins; Pekka Savola; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Optimistic DAD draft ... On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 11:15:50AM -0400, Bound, Jim wrote: > [Nick 'Sharkey' Moore wrote:] > > 1000ms is a long time by anyone's standards! > > I simply cannot believe it is 1000 ms. Like I said lets get some > empircal data. I was referring to the DAD delay, eg: RETRANS_TIMER from RFC 2461. We could obviously just reduce the RETRANS_TIMER value, but for real-time services we'd have to ask ourselves "How long is too long for real-time? How short is too short for reliable collision detection?" -----N -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
