>>>>> On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 07:09:02 +1100,
>>>>> "Nick 'Sharkey' Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> Yes, DIID probably (or something similar). I believe that simplest
>> solution is that a specific ID value can be allowed only for single
>> node on the link. Any use of same ID part with any prefix by another
>> node should be viewed as an address collision.
> I can see where you are coming from: for DAD to safely
> interoperate with DIID it must send even more messages: wouldn't
> it be nice to just send a single NS/NA pair? After all,
> DIID is already compatible with DIID.
> I'm convinced that a change needs to be made to the wording to
> resolve this issue, but I'm not sure which is the better option.
> I'm also dubious about relying on votes at IETF meetings for
> technical issues ... because often an option which seems 'obvious'
> at the time actually isn't once the drafts have been considered
> in detail. And most of the WG attendees won't have considered
> them in detail before the meeting. Sad but true.
(I know this is not a technical discussion, so I'll try to refrain
myself from making further posting on this particular point. But feel
free to respond to this message, of course)
I see your frustration, but we have been experiencing similar cases
for controversial discussions many times here in the IETF. The
"consensus" or "decision" often looks like an unreasonable result just
supported by a majority without thinking the issue carefully, if you
are against the consensus. Let's just recall the recent site-local
discussions...
Unfortunately, we must often make a decision, or even compromise
anyway to move forward. Even though there are some valid points in
DIID, I don't think what we have now in this discussion is worth
revisiting the past decision and delaying the process.
JINMEI, Tatuya
Communication Platform Lab.
Corporate R&D Center, Toshiba Corp.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
