>>>>> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:36:19 +0900, >>>>> "S. Daniel Park" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> One fundamental question that I remember is whether optimizing DAD >> really makes much sense while there are other kinds of delays such as >> random delay (up to 1 second) for the first RS and random delay at >> routers before responding to an RS. Without addressing the >> fundamental question(s), we'd simply restart similar divergent >> discussions, waisting lots of energy and time without seeing progress. > So, one draft was proposed to clarify what you indicate and I posted it > on the IPv6 mailing list. > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-park-dna-ipv6dadopt-requirement-02.txt Thanks for the pointer, I've read the draft. Unfortunately, it only covers the delay for the first RS, and not others (e.g., the delay at routers before responding to RSs). I respect the effort of you guys, but I'd rather want to see a comprehensive scenario before introducing additional mechanism to solve a part of the entire issues. 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------
