RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-lineid-05.txt> (The Line Identification Destination Option) to Experimental RFC

RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com> Thu, 07 June 2012 16:18 UTC

Return-Path: <rja.lists@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF26D11E810C for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.528
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.528 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.071, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6umiBBygA+aB for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C1C111E810F for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Jun 2012 09:18:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcqp1 with SMTP id p1so473597vcq.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:message-id :to:mime-version:x-mailer; bh=7uG3qHYt9yUQhNegom8xGKaUSYfdvLOSMAqsqn92ZfQ=; b=cLZqGw7y5uw23jIfnml6uZWTKmA6NVLh6ny6FPibBy6ZBzmcbB+LSgrMXZnuwqf48K fcRinTTa1PuuppT2gP7o4GdAz02F1MjThDuyuU+hNdO3U76/CTQEOuDH/8L0dVjHHhUF ENleacRpbq0zGOF5CCTmCe/72fbTxcKxEiJT6EKExFoshf0k06TQKLjnqMJBG59frO7d lJ/v/n8DKuFz9VBXJIL0xALHUzV/qwyWBn3B36hpaTe+q8bh426h3Md9txHAJW631tBx NNb3A5K/AAQAGG0vhSCFA6vzB03qrPSFucnZ2KwPWJuA2SLm0w7x2+Y7/q4ZZBCzPyLw g2Mw==
Received: by 10.52.69.200 with SMTP id g8mr2248912vdu.113.1339085932866; Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.30.20.11] (pool-96-225-134-175.nrflva.fios.verizon.net. [96.225.134.175]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c17sm5203730vdj.11.2012.06.07.09.18.50 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 07 Jun 2012 09:18:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: RJ Atkinson <rja.lists@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: RE: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-lineid-05.txt> (The Line Identification Destination Option) to Experimental RFC
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:18:49 -0400
Message-Id: <043AB3A8-7E94-4082-8207-FF59AD129075@gmail.com>
To: ipv6@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2012 16:18:54 -0000

One (non-blocking) side comment to the discussion (contained
within "draft-dec-6man-rs-access-harmful") that IPv6 RS messages 
are specified at present to avoid repetitive RS messages after 
a host's initial (re)initialisation period might be worth repeating.

On low bandwidth links (e.g. many commonly used radio links), 
it is very important to keep the ND traffic low, so that the 
link capacity can be used for actual user/data traffic.  

While it is great that some very recent IEEE 802.11 specifications 
enable higher link capacity wireless LAN segments, there remain 
many existing radio link technologies that are unlikely ever
to have higher link capacity.  First-responder radios are especially 
likely to have significantly constrained link capacity, for example.

Yours,

Ran