Re: Neighbor Unreachability Detection is too impatient

[Wes Beebee <[e-mail]>]

Erik,

I have seen NUD packets dropped during congestion, and for traffic to
periodically drop out for re-resolution.  I agree with the goal of making
NUD more robust.  However, there may be other approaches besides
retransmitting more times.

- Wes

On 5/23/11 2:46 PM, "Erik Nordmark" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 
> This draft proposes to change the requirement that NUD can not
> retransmit more than three times, so that NUD can be more robust against
> temporary network outages.
> 
> Comments?
> 
>     Erik
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for
> draft-nordmark-6man-impatient-nud-00.txt
> Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 11:43:16 -0700
> From: [e-mail]
> To: [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail]
> 
> A new version of I-D, draft-nordmark-6man-impatient-nud-00.txt has been
> successfully submitted by Erik Nordmark and posted to the IETF repository.
> 
> Filename:  draft-nordmark-6man-impatient-nud
> Revision:  00
> Title:   Neighbor Unreachability Detection is too impatient
> Creation date:  2011-05-23
> WG ID:   Individual Submission
> Number of pages: 5
> 
> Abstract:
>     IPv6 Neighbor Discovery includes Neighbor Unreachability Detection.
>     That function is very useful when a host has an alternative, for
>     instance multiple default routers, since it allows the host to switch
>     to the alternative in short time.  This time is 3 seconds after the
>     node starts probing.  However, if there are no alternatives, this is
>     far too impatient.  This document proposes an approach where an
>     implementation can choose the timeout behavior to be different based
>     on whether or not there are alternatives.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> The IETF Secretariat
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> [e-mail]
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------