Re: DAD question

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 14/08/2012 18:16, Simon Perreault wrote:
> Le 2012-08-14 12:28, Fred Baker (fred) a écrit :
>> Where I'm coming from in this is an expectation on my part that
>> appears to not be shared. If duplicate MAC addresses are unusual but
>> reasonably common (happen with some probability like .01% or
>> whatever), there's a reasonable expectation that there would be a
>> work-around for the issue. The work-around, I suggest, would be to
>> have the station use a privacy address instead of a MAC-based address
>> when a duplicate MAC address is detected.
> 
> Since privacy addresses are supposed to be configured alongside regular
> SLAAC addresses, there should be no need for an explicit fallback. Just
> enable both SLAAC and privacy simultaneously. If SLAAC fails, you still
> have privacy.

True, but you won't have connectivity on any network that uses MAC address
registration as a form of weak access control. Not that IPv6 can solve that
problem, but it should be noted.

    Brian