re: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nordmark-6man-impatient-nud-00

I'm afraid have more questions than answers.

Are there any implications for different nodes having different NUD timeout behavior on a link, and this no longer being symmetrical?

If I can think of two examples......

e.g. 1. Say Node A (router) declares node C (end node) unreachable but Node B (alternate back up router) has not yet timed out node C?

I'm guessing this case is just like a split-brain segment, so is not significant compared to existing failures.

Now the case of router failover....

e.g. 2. Say Node A (end host) declares node B (router) unreachable locally, but node B (router) is still up and running but has not yet timed out Node A.

Is that significant? I suspect so. After all if the raison d'etre of changing NUD timers is to quicken / slow down router failover, surely Node B (the router) also has to time out at the same speed as the end host (Node A) otherwise the router will continue to advertise valid routes to node A, and packets will black hole/queue anyway until NUD on node B also notices the failure.

Vice versa is also true, if the router notices the failure first, but the end node does not react to the failure and hangs around retrying NUD, packets may queue/black hole in the other direction.

In the good old days we had things like gratuitous ARP for such events to attempt to wake up end nodes to refresh their cache, but if they got lost in some layer 2 STP thrashing it didn't help much anyway.

Is there thus a need for any over-ridden NUD parameters to be synchronized across all nodes on a link e.g. via RA messages?

Is there a minimum and maximum timeout needed? To prevent danger of an update storm [as specified in RFC2461 that all Neighbor Solicitations are rate-limited on a per-neighbor basis] or "stuck in stale".

regards,
RayH
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to