Hi Joe, The current text in intarea-ipv4-id-update is "no current deployments are known". I read this as a statement in general. Then, it is not correct. I am fine with discouragement of usage of systems that use IP_ID for DPD, but such systems are around.
Teco Op 30 mrt 2011, om 13:46 heeft Joe Touch het volgende geschreven: > Hi, Teco, > > On 3/30/2011 4:29 AM, Teco Boot wrote: >> Sorry for x-posting. But there is a conflict in: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-smf >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update >> >> SMF has a duplicate packet detection function based on the IPv4 >> ID field. So text in ietf-intarea-ipv4-id-update section 4 >> is not correct, in that there would be no deployments for such. > > SMF is experimental. When we talk about deployments of duplicate detection, > we're focused on standards-based systems. > > Note that ipv4-id-update is standards-track. > >> That said, SMF deployment with IPv4 DPD on IP-ID would be limited. >> >> What to do? > > IMO, recommend H-DPD and change the discussion to explain why the ID > shouldn't be used for DPD (the text is basically already there - it mentions > the idea, but then explains that it's not likely to work anyway). > > Use of the IP ID for this purpose is problematic for a variety of reasons, > which is why ipv4-id-update deprecates use of that field for that purpose. > > Joe _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
