On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 09:47 +0200, Dan Luedtke wrote:
> > Since then, router solicitations would be issued regularly until
> > client recieves RA with RDNSS, connection is cancelled by user or:
> 
> We have a setup here were we have 50+ clients on some access points
> with about 100 access points distributed over the campus, all merged
> into one network. Let's say we have about 3k clients in the network
> which is a good average value. Let us further assume we loose these
> three RA before they reach the access points, so that no access point
> sends them out. (Of course they usually get lost on some access
> points, not on all at the same time, but it might happen in some
> situations). Since not all clients connected to the network at the
> same time, we assume that one third of them hasn't received the third
> RA in a row at some point in time. At this particular point at least
> 1k clients start sending out RS in a short period of time, at least
> until the first RA makes it through. A way of distributing this RS on
> a time scale might be a good idea. At some point we should use a
> random value to make the hosts delay sending RS with different values
> 
> Long story short: Please include Teemu's suggestion (randomization) in
> a possible errata. IMHO this must be part of it!

I agree. We definitely consider this but also other problems. Looking
forward to publishing the ideas and discussing it here.

Just a note. Current code of NetworkManager for Linux sends RS
non-randomized 5 seconds before expiration.

Pavel

> FYI: Although I see the race condition and I would also like to see an
> errata on this issue, I'd like to point anyone having problems with
> lossy links to RFC 1256, page 3.
> > Links that suffer high packet loss rates or frequent partitioning are 
> > accommodated by increasing the rate of advertisements, rather than 
> > increasing the number of solicitations that hosts are permitted to send.
> 
> regards
>   Dan


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to