On 10/17/11 9:32 AM, Ray Hunter wrote:
Would therefore humbly suggest a minimum/ default / recommendation of an
8 octet nonce option (minus the existing 16 pre-assigned bits) meaning
48 bits available for the nonce field, with the option of using longer
16 or 24 octet nonce options if an impleme
From: Thomas Narten [mailto:nar...@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 6:15 AM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou; IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
The WG should produce one single document, not two.
The WG should produce one single document, not two. This is pretty
simple stuff here and we don't need 2 documents, each only 5 pages
long.
Indeed, I think it's sort of unfortunate that we have started out with
two competing documents, for no good reason that I can see. Its not
like the proposed a
going through a scanner on a palette and all trying to get an
address at once.
regards,
RayH
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:41:05 +0200
From: Philip Homburg
To: "Hemant Singh (shemant)"
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh
,draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
>Since the number of bits for the nonce was an open question for the -01
document, we will add text in a -02 version reflecting the closure. So
then it
>should be OK to specify the default to be 48 bits and let an
implementation use higher length
-Original Message-
From: Ray Hunter [mailto:v6...@globis.net]
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 12:33 PM
To: Philip Homburg; Hemant Singh (shemant); Ole Troan; Brian E Carpenter
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for,
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
I think 20 bits should be already be more than enough. For simplicity, I would
just go for 64 bits.
Assuming hosts generate sufficiently strong pseudo-random numbers, 20 bits
means that once every one million cases of a genuine duplicate address,
both hosts may mistakenly assume there is a loopb
In your letter dated Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:25:19 -0500 you wrote:
>Appreciate the quick reply. Note BrianC already noted that 20 bits will
>not suffice by saying "It puts you into birthday-paradox territory on a
>LAN with a few hundred nodes.". His email is at the URL below.
>
>http://www.ietf.org/
In your letter dated Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:14:21 -0500 you wrote:
>-Original Message-
>From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 3:18 PM
>To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
>Cc: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou; IPv6 WG Mailing List
>Subject: Re: FW: New V
-Original Message-
From: pch-b29aa8...@u-1.phicoh.com [mailto:pch-b29aa8...@u-1.phicoh.com]
On Behalf Of Philip Homburg
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 11:00 AM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad
-Original Message-
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 3:18 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou; IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
once .
>
>
>
> Hemant
>
>
>
> From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnetgroup.gr]
> Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2011 7:50 AM
> To: Brian E Carpenter
> Cc: Hemant Singh (shemant); IPv6 WG Mailing List
> Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
Also, looking at draft-ietf-6man-flow-3697bis-07, i can see the following under
introduction:
A stateful
scenario is one where a node that processes the flow label value
needs to store information
rsion Notification for draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
I have no objection Brian. I can understand the reason for keeping the flow label "clean".
I was just wondering if there were any plans to use the flow label for ND traffic too, or
we should consider that there are no r
Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote on 15/10/2011 02:57:
Tassos,
-Original Message-
From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnetgroup.gr]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 7:31 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft
PM
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: Hemant Singh (shemant); IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
I have no objection Brian. I can understand the reason for keeping the flow
label "clean".
I was just wondering if there were any p
thomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnet.gr]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:29 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
I was wondering...wouldn't the flow label be a "better" field for
s
Tassos,
-Original Message-
From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnetgroup.gr]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 7:31 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
>btw, draft-as
t;
>> From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnet.gr]
>> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:29 PM
>> To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
>> Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
>> draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
>>
>>
>
Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote on 15/10/2011 01:41:
Tassos,
From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnet.gr]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:29 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
Tassos,
From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnet.gr]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:29 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
>Lastly, i have a question about your example w
Hi,
I was wondering...wouldn't the flow label be a "better" field for
storing this random number?
If i remember correctly, early drafts of RPL were using it for loop
detection (ok, in a very different way), although in the later ones
a new option was chosen.
Tassos,
From: Tassos Chatzithomaoglou [mailto:ach...@forthnet.gr]
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2011 6:29 PM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: IPv6 WG Mailing List
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-hsingh-6man-enhanced-dad-01.txt
>I was wondering...wouldn't the flow la
23 matches
Mail list logo
