1 / 6

Detecting Network Attachment in IPv6 Best Current Practices for hosts draft-ietf-dna-hosts-01.txt

Detecting Network Attachment in IPv6 Best Current Practices for hosts draft-ietf-dna-hosts-01.txt. Sathya Narayanan Greg Daley Nicolas Montavont. Issues. Erik’s comments: Re-structuring suggestion Link change vs same link Reachability detection Unnecessary information

hertz
Download Presentation

Detecting Network Attachment in IPv6 Best Current Practices for hosts draft-ietf-dna-hosts-01.txt

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Detecting Network Attachment in IPv6Best Current Practices for hostsdraft-ietf-dna-hosts-01.txt Sathya Narayanan Greg Daley Nicolas Montavont

  2. Issues • Erik’s comments: • Re-structuring suggestion • Link change vs same link • Reachability detection • Unnecessary information • Comments from Subba Reddy incorporated. (00 to 01)

  3. Restructuring • Current draft has one section on DNA steps • Making using of prior information • DAD • Link Identification (Same vs change) • MLD • Reachability detection

  4. Link change vs same link • Suggestion: We just need mechanism to detect link change (CPL is recommended for it). • De we need the ‘same link’ section? • I think Yes. • How the node can quickly confirm that it is on the same link?

  5. Reachability detection • Last email on this subject: • “A couple of words describing that ND handles this or a caveat about bad links may be sufficient”. • I interpreted this to mean a sub-section is alright. • Current draft • If a node wants • A table about reachability implication for different RS/RA and NS/NA exchanges • Mention packet loss.

  6. Other sections (Unnecessary information?) • Hints (Reduced to make it more succinct) • To initiate change detection • IP hosts configuration • Configuration that should be invalidated when link change happens. • Complications to DNA • Security considerations ;-)

More Related