On Thu, Oct 17, 2002 at 12:54:34PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: > > Optimistic DAD is a useful optimization because DAD is far more > likely to succeed than fail, by a factor of at least 10,000,000,000 > to one[SOTO]. This makes it worth a little disruption in the failure > case to provide faster handovers in the successful case, as long as > the disruption is recoverable. > > ==> this is totally, and completely wrong. [SOTO] only provide analysis > in *some* cases, in particular autoconfigured vs privacy addresses.
I see what you mean. I need to make it clear that [SOTO] and I are referring to strongly random addresses ... this is a requirement for my Optimistic DAD draft anyway for exactly this reason. Do you this it is fair to say: DAD is far more likely to succeed than fail FOR RANDOMLY AUTOCONFIGURED ADDRESSES, by a factor of at least 10,000,000,000 to one[SOTO]. Do you think it would be advisable for me to add: Optimistic DAD MUST NOT be used for manually configured addresses ... because as you point out, manually configured addresses are far more likely to fail and being a MobileIP type I'm mainly interested in configuring CoAs anyway. > For manually assigned addresses, I believe the ratio is closer > to 1:10 or 1:100 (unmeasurable, of course). I'd be really interested to know if anyone has any indicative figures on MAC address collision: it is inevitable that somewhere out there there are two adaptors with the same MAC address due to human frailties, but how many? Thanks for your feedback! -----Nick -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
