Subject: [DNA] Analysis of IPv6 Relocation Delays

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 01:01:38 +0200

Hi everybody,

as I had mentioned on this list before, we wrote a little draft on the
latency of IPv6 relocation due to delayed MLD Reports.  Here is the
abstract:

    Mobile nodes require fast IPv6 relocation.  Yet, router discovery,
    address auto-configuration, and support for TSLLAOs depend on delayed
    MLD signaling, defeating existing optimizations in many situations.

    This document identifies problematic situations.  It proposes delay
    relaxations for MLD Reports or use of optimistic addresses prior to
    the initial Neighbor Solicitation to improve them.

Until the draft becomes available at the official repository, you can
access it here:

http://doc.tm.uka.de/2005/draft-vogt-dna-relocation-00.txt

Note that the purpose of this draft is NOT to evolve itself within the
DNA WG.  Rather, it is supposed to be a basis for a mailing-list
discussion and maybe provide some text for existing WG documents.

Regards,
- Christian

--
Christian Vogt, Institute of Telematics, University of Karlsruhe
www.tm.uka.de/~chvogt/pubkey/

---

From: Greg Daley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:03:39 +1000

Hi Christian,

Thanks for the draft, and your efforts in raising this for discussion.

This is definitely an important issue.

I guess that the primary issue is with regard to snooping switches,
since otherwise multicast delivery will succeed.
The problem is that a host cannot necessarily know if snooping
is in place, when it arrives at a point-of-attachment.

Perhaps it would be good to mention this in the draft (referring
also to the snoop draft).

Thanks Again,

Greg

---

From: Christian Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:18:06 +0200

Hi Greg.

 > is in place, when it arrives at a point-of-attachment.

Right.

 > also to the snoop draft).

Yes, I added this paragraph to the "Brief Analysis" section (for the 01 
version).  "[*]" is a reference to draft-ietf-magma-snoop-12.txt.

    ++++
    Transmission of MLD Reports can lead to undesired signaling overhead.
    Furthermore, with respect to router discovery and address auto-
    configuration, MLD Reports have a benefit only in the presence of
    snooping switches [*].  The crux is that a mobile node usually does
    not know a new link's topology at attachment time, so it seems that
    omission of MLD Reports would become feasible only with appropriate
    support from the link layer.
    ++++

Bye,
- Christian