On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 02:29 -0700, Soliman, Hesham wrote: > > > Thanks. But I still believe that a host should be able to test > > if it is reachable in dormant mode (reachable, or reachable within > > reasonable delay). This is good for dormant mode security. > > => I'm not sure that you appreciate the fact that these are *logical* > channels, where *logical* means that they're essentially different slots > on the same frequency (e.g. in FDD systems). What you're suggesting is > equivalent to saying that you want to test whether a particular field in > a frame can be set to a specific value. It seems very strange to me in > the context of reachability detection.
The paging channel is not dedicated to one terminal, it serves all terminals (there are thousands of terminals in a paging area). Paging channels can be overloaded (naturally or maliciously). In this case, an incoming session may be missed. For paging, a different, special and stateful protocol is used. It is not just a link. It has an architecture and protocol. Failure is possible. How the dormant host detects these problems? Periodically generating an RA and delivering it to the dormant host, looked like a good test to me. pars > > Hesham -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [email protected] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
