Subject: RE: 2461bis and host-load-sharing

From: "Soliman, Hesham" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:48:27 -0500

Dave, 
 
I think we can handle this during IESG last call. Does anyone oppose Dave's suggestion 
below to update this statement according to RFC 4311 ?
 
Thx,
Hesham

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of Dave Thaler
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 1:37 PM
To: JINMEI Tatuya / ????
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: 2461bis and host-load-sharing

draft-ietf-ipv6-2461bis-05.txt  says in 6.3.6:

    An implementation may choose to always return the same router or

    cycle through the router list in a round-robin fashion as long

    as it always returns a reachable or a probably reachable router

    when one is available.

However RFC 4311 (draft-ietf-ipv6-host-load-sharing-04.txt) updates 

RFC 2461, is a Proposed Standard, and says:

    [ND] ...

    specifies that an implementation may always choose the same router

    (e.g., the first in the list) or may cycle through the routers in

    a round-robin manner.  Both of these suggestions are problematic.

    [...]

If 2461bis is intended to obsolete RFC 2461, then I think the statement

in 6.3.6 should be updated to be in accordance with RFC 4311.  Otherwise

RFC 4311 will have to be republished to update 2461bis.

-Dave

===========================================================
This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use
 of the intended recipient.  Any review or distribution by others is strictly
 prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender
 and delete all copies.
===========================================================

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:08:37 -0800

Hesham,

> below to update this statement according to RFC 4311 ?

Before answering the question, what would the exact change be to  
draft-ietf-ipv6-2461bis-05.txt?

One consideration is that the update to 2661 is being submitted at  
Draft standard and we need to be carefull to not make incompatible  
changes.  This probably not the case here, but I would like to see  
the proposed text.

Thanks,
Bob

> ========================================================
> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the  
> sole
> use of the intended recipient.  Any review or distribution by  
> others is
> strictly prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient please  
> contact
> the sender and delete all copies.
> ========================================================
>