Subject: RE: MIPv6 and ND value changes

From: "Hesham Soliman (EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 17:52:13 +0100

I'm getting very confused when reading this 
discussion. Some people are focusing on the 
RA intervals, others about DAD (2462) and 
others talk generally about ND. 

Please divide the issues...
AFAIK we have the following (independent) issues:

- RA intervals were reduced by MIPv6 (changing 2461)
- When DAD fails we configure a new address and try again (2462)
- Elimination of DAD delays (optimistic DAD)
- Eliminsation of the random delay before sending an RA (fast RA)

The last two bullets are addressed in separate drafts. 
The first 2 bullets are in the MIPv6 spec, and the 
second bullet has nothing to do with 2461.

There are different value for each point, they're all
important, but let's not lump them all in one discussion.

Hesham
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Vijay Devarapalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 09:53:02 -0800

> second bullet has nothing to do with 2461.

I agree with Hesham. we should treat them as separate issues 
instead of lumping them all as ND changes. atleast bullets 
1 and 2 should definitely be in the MIPv6 spec.

Vijay

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 20:10:01 +0200 (EET)

> 1 and 2 should definitely be in the MIPv6 spec.

Disagree on 1. and _definitely on 2.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords