Subject: RE: DAD vs. DIID

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 09:38:22 -0400

Hi Brian,

Although I generally agree with your other thoughts on DIID vs. DAD,
I don't understand these portions:

>"DIID":
>  - Multi-link subnet routers would have to defend
>    link-local addresses across links, which could be
>    considered confusing and nonsensical.
>
>"DAD":
>  - No strange consequences for multi-link subnets.

Why would performing DAD or DIID change the requirement for
link-local address uniqueness across a subnet?

And, even if it did, what does this really simplify, since
site-local and global addresses will still have to be
unique across a subnet?

Since DAD neighbor advertisements are not sent to the target
address, but are instead sent to the solicited-node multicast
address derived from the target address, routers on multi-link
subnets will already have to forward packets to the 
solicited-node multicast address between links of a multi-link
subnet, so that site-local and global DAD will work.  

So, those routers would need to perform more complex processing,
based on the target address within the NA, to _not_ forward
link-local DAD packets across a multilink subnet.

Am I misunderstanding something?

Margaret

--------------------------------------------------------------------
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-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Abdul Basit <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 13:26:45 -0500 (CDT)

Hello,

 Can anyone give me some pointers/urls on MPLS and IPv6 integeration
(and or a possible comparasion of MPLS vs flowlabel?)..

- basit
Wichita state university
MSCS student.