IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Efficientnd-dt] Food for thought - router-controlled RS refresh

Erik Nordmark <nordmark@sonic.net> Mon, 25 August 2014 18:07 UTC

Return-Path: <nordmark@sonic.net>
X-Original-To: efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 735951A01F4 for <efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:07:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.669
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.669 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NCf61rSPDWSk for <efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:07:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBD991A01D5 for <efficientnd-dt@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.22.249.34] ([162.210.130.4]) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s7PI7i0B023298 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:07:44 -0700
Message-ID: <53FB7B70.6030501@sonic.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 11:07:44 -0700
From: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@sonic.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
References: <53F5A0F6.5060909@acm.org> <53F5A14F.70501@sonic.net> <CAAedzxqwuiPQ6=oimgkGPfq0rtHuTo=Z5Ph=a+a22ei606ft4w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxqwuiPQ6=oimgkGPfq0rtHuTo=Z5Ph=a+a22ei606ft4w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVYorreYZhvQg8nNKTpbByXi0E/tWDIVm9er0sZQZJx984MhK6MlCjvq/2ZUR/cxpK9GbnG0y5i3ANmc9i5G8Br9
X-Sonic-ID: C;yHUrtoIs5BGxvicfoK8kYw== M;dhpHtoIs5BGxvicfoK8kYw==
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/efficientnd-dt/wF0QDa78owrWZs_CEnne9sgxeO8
Cc: "efficientnd-dt@ietf.org" <efficientnd-dt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Efficientnd-dt] Food for thought - router-controlled RS refresh
X-BeenThere: efficientnd-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: 6man Efficient ND Design Team discussion list <efficientnd-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/efficientnd-dt>, <mailto:efficientnd-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/efficientnd-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:efficientnd-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:efficientnd-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/efficientnd-dt>, <mailto:efficientnd-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:07:59 -0000

On 8/24/14, 11:51 PM, Erik Kline wrote:
> Thanks for writing this up.
>
> A question: is it a problem if we make resilient-rs a MUST for 
> rs-refresh implementations?
> ​

IMHO It would make sense to implement both at the the same time.

If we could argue that a MUST dependency makes sense it would be fine 
with me.
The argument could be something like:
---
If rs-refresh is implemented and someone deploys a network which assume 
hosts do rs-refresh, than a host which didn't do resilent-rs would be 
completely dead if their 3 initial RSs were lost. But even without a 
rs-refresh such hosts would be dead for a long time (until the periodic 
multicast RA).
Therefor it is strongly RECOMMENDED that hosts which implement 
rs-refresh also implement resilent-rs.
---

Can we make that a MUST or do we need a stronger argument?

    Erik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email