On 2005-10-19, Christian Vogt wrote: > > "The initial Neighbor Solicitation MUST be transmitted as early as > possible after the Optimistic Address has been flagged as 'Optimistic', > but it MUST NOT violate any delays or rate limitations set forth by > RFC2461 or RFC2462.
Actually, I disagree. In order to provide timely address configuration, we MUST violate these delays. As I understand it, until we've performed the MLD report, we can't reliably receive NSes ... and thus we may not be able to send our NA(O=0) and can't respond to communications! Also, the longer we delay the NS, the longer we have to wait to discover a collision. This is a big disadvantage to the arriving node, because in the case of a collision it's not getting any traffic. It's also a small disadvantage to the collidee, because it may get traffic which was meant for the arriving ON. I think L2 collision avoidance is best left to L2 in any case. Elimination of these delays was proposed by some "Fast RS" draft or another at some point, although I don't think I ever wrote up the Soft vs. Hard Handover draft I'd been intending to ... -----Nick -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
