On 5/25/11 2:10 AM, Philip Homburg wrote:
In your letter dated Tue, 24 May 2011 10:22:09 -0700 you wrote:
On 5/24/11 10:12 AM, Philip Homburg wrote:
With current RFC 4861 this means that the NCE has to be discarded, since
the neighbor is deemed UNREACHABLE.
Without the NCE, the next time the node tries to send a packet, it will
end up multicasting NS messages.
So you are saying (with a bit exaggeration from my side) that some links
in data centers have so many hosts that a network disruption of a few seconds
will cause a multicast storm big enough to meltdown the network.
Philip,
No that isn't what I said.
I said that the current assumed maximum 3 NUD probes one second apart
makes IPv6/ND less flexible than IPv4/ARP, and I think we should remove
those constraints.
I'm having a hard time understanding what point you are trying to make,
and whether or not it relates to the text in the draft. Please send some
suggested text changes to the draft if you think that would address your
concern.
Thanks,
Erik
With modern CPUs and a Gbit/s network that seems very odd to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
