On 5/24/11 5:45 AM, Thomas Narten wrote:
I support this document.
Thanks.
As one example, the cost of multicast on wifi is significantly higher
than unicast. Yet, the ND spec calls for deleting an NCE if NUD fails,
resulting in a fallback to multicast for address resolution. While
this is a simple and straightforward way to make the protocol work, I
can imagine worthwhile optimizations whereby ND is more conservative
in falling back to multicast and deleting an NCE that was working fine
just a few seconds ago. For example, one could continue probing a
neighbor using both unicast and multicast, and one could continue to
forward traffic to a unicast neighbor vs. discarding it because the
NCE has been deleted.
Agreed.
The key thing is that when there is a choice (a host with multiple
default routers and perhaps a NCE created by a redirect) that the
failure of NUD cause it to try an alternative.
But if there is no such choice, keeping the NCE around and using it,
while trying multicast NS packets, makes a lot of sense. Even if there
is a choice, it can make sense to keep the NCE around but marked as
UNREACHABLE, if that makes it easier to recover.
Should I add your suggestion to the draft?
Erik
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
