Francis Dupont wrote:
In your previous mail you wrote:
> > - whether omitting/optimizing DAD is a good idea
> > => IMHO this is the same thing, i.e., optimizing gives the same result
> than omitting.
Omitting DAD altogether removes the ability to detect and correct
address collisions, whereas optimizations such as Optimistic DAD
mean that while there may be a short term disruption the problem
will be detected and corrected.
=> in the real world this kind of problem cannot be corrected...
The only thing you can do is to avoid to reproduce the same error again.
That's a rather broad statement to make, since there may not be L2 address conflicts, and EUI based v6 addresses may not be used.
What really matters then is the effect on (the real) address owner's and configuring node's applications.
I think it's worth getting implementors' experience with address conflicts with DAD, without DAD and with optimizations.
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS: optimistic DAD is like optimistic russian roulette: look at in the chamber after to check it is empty.
That's highly emotive talk which doesn't help the discussion.
Greg
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
