Re: Adoption Call for "Improving the Robustness of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Flash Renumbering Events"

[Tim Chown <[e-mail]>]

On 29 Jun 2020, at 08:49, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Yup. Like I said, most of the document consists of simple tweaks that in many cases are already allowed by existing standards. That definitely seems publishable.

I don’t think adoption means we would include everything in the document in the final version that is published.  If “most of the document” contains advice you think is publishable, then should we not adopt and work on consensus on what is in the final version?

I do agree that data on evidence of the problem would be welcomed.  The user experience may be protected by other mechanisms such as happy eyeballs.

> Another much simpler approach that could be taken to solve this problem is to recommend that if a host receives an RA where previous prefix(es) - or more in general, previous options - have disappeared, then it should attempt to re-check that information's validity in some way (e.g., by attempting off-link connectivity).

That would seem to be one good bit of advice to include.

Best wishes,
Tim