On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 05:26:22PM -0700, Alper E. YEGIN wrote: > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > > 2) I'm not sure if this is the right approach. Something better suited > > could be found, I believe, in adding functionality to first-hop routers' > > ND cache behaviour; > > This is the approach I've been looking at. But there is a problem. [...]
My colleague Greg Daley has been working on the same problem (eliminating DAD) from this direction: see draft-daley-ipv6-mcast-dad-01.txt > But when a router starts with no state (a new one, or rebooting > after crash), it might never learn about regular nodes that > have already done DAD. [...] So, unless this problem is solved, > the applicability of this solution is limited to networks where > all nodes support the required extensions.. Any ideas? This is my concern too: my aim with my draft was to work out a possible solution where totally unmodified nodes would interoperate correctly. > > For manually assigned addresses, I believe the ratio is closer to > > 1:10 or 1:100 (unmeasurable, of course). > > I must be missing something.. How come this probability is so high? Humans have remarkably lousy RNGs! I'm willing to believe Pekka on this one, because I've had many experiences with people assigning static V4 addresses ... "hey, we're up to x.y.z.57 aren't we? It's not in /etc/hosts on _my_ workstation ..." -----Nick "... hey, look, there's nothing registered to x.y.z.255 either!" -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
