Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-6man-resilient-rs-02.txt

[Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>]

[Resending with hopefully correct author mailing list]


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 4:38 PM, <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>    When an interface on a host is initialized, the host transmits Router
>>    Solicitations in order to minimize the amount of time it needs to
>>    wait until the next unsolicited multicast Router Advertisement is
>>    received.  In certain scenarios, these router solicitations
>>    transmitted by the host might be lost.  This document specifies a
>>    mechanism for hosts to cope with the loss of the initial Router
>>    Solicitations.  Furthermore, on some links, unsolicited multicast
>>    Router Advertisements are never sent and the mechanism in this
>>    document is intended to work even in such scenarios.
>>
>
> Authors,
>
> One comment here.
>
> If the intent is that we should be able to run networks that do not send
> periodic RAs at all, then this document will need to require that hosts
> send router solicitations when their RAs (or whatever is in the RA
> contents, including lifetimes of PIOs, RIOs, RDNSS options, etc.) are about
> to expire - otherwise the hosts will lose connectivity.
>
> This may be difficult to specify correctly. Specifically, it may be hard
> to distinguish something that is being deprecated by the network (e.g., an
> RA whose lifetime is counting down because it comes from a PD) from an RA
> that is about to expire.
>
> If the intent is not that we should be able to run networks without
> periodic RAs, then at least the text in 2b needs to change.
>
> Cheers,
> Lorenzo
>