On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:23:55AM +0900, hyunwook cha wrote:
What if DHCPv6 servers do not exist? AFAIK, in this thread, the cost
of unnecessary multicast DHCPv6 messages which may be prevented
through MO bits are being discussed.
That's a separate issue. Iljitsch is proposing that
On 24 okt 2008, at 18:38, David W. Hankins wrote:
What if DHCPv6 servers do not exist? AFAIK, in this thread, the cost
of unnecessary multicast DHCPv6 messages which may be prevented
through MO bits are being discussed.
That's a separate issue. Iljitsch is proposing that Multicasts must
be
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 04:18:48PM +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
Obviously multicasts are useful so I'm not saying we can't have any. But in
I just want to say that what I'm actually hearing in this is that
you'll waffle on the performance criteria you invented so long as it
means you get
Just a few things that I think are potential factual errors or
misreads that need clarifying.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 09:48:42AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
It's not a question of problematic yes/no. More multicasts means less
performance for other stuff. Obviously ARP and ND already
Replying to your change of subject, not (necessarily) the message
itself:
At the last IETF meeting, I captured a bunch of wireless traffic
during the plenary with the idea to analyze the broadcasts to see how
much airtime they take up. Unfortunately, I didn't get around to it
and deleted
Hello, David.
A few comments are inserted.
2008/10/23 David W. Hankins [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Just a few things that I think are potential factual errors or
misreads that need clarifying.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 09:48:42AM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
It's not a question of problematic
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:48:42 +0200
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 13 okt 2008, at 22:59, Thomas Narten wrote:
So, clients will retransmit about once every 2 minutes.
But they'll transmit packets more frequently initially.
This is unnecessary multicast traffic that
On 13 okt 2008, at 22:59, Thomas Narten wrote:
So, clients will retransmit about once every 2 minutes.
But they'll transmit packets more frequently initially.
This is unnecessary multicast traffic that could easily affect wifi
performance because on 802.11 multicasts are generally sent at
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 13 okt 2008, at 22:59, Thomas Narten wrote:
So, clients will retransmit about once every 2 minutes.
But they'll transmit packets more frequently initially.
Sure.
It's not a question of problematic yes/no. More multicasts means
less
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 13 okt 2008, at 18:19, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
I don't have any use for DHCPv6. I need a way to shut up DHCPv6
clients that may end up visiting my network. Running DHCPv6 in a
network that doesn't support is is especially harmful
10 matches
Mail list logo
