IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast

"Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com> Fri, 17 July 2015 07:34 UTC

Return-Path: <fred@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B2121B309C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:34:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -114.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-114.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2ri85WAUNsq for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DC0A1B3084 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 00:34:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2272; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1437118454; x=1438328054; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=jTiePh3xY11QQ1nnWqYTEkBRlbj3NCA1LQfPKlS2qJo=; b=INgSZUgPxrCB4uZdfpMAwRp8MAMsDte/JgkwjDsLCaNTi3dItCn5KeH8 fwN+kcpvaFOUV9+E6bz4BVbe6tBBE/Om2Xgxwg7+e/SZuANQZq41pCxll O0USwS//zsGf1WAHCAl92O1zseDgZUWMq5vYwmbJ19jUiwXcGwOWh1ZCQ I=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 833
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0ANBQBRr6hV/5JdJa1agxOBQ7teh2wCgUQ6EgEBAQEBAQGBCoQkAQEDAXkQAgEIRjIlAgQOE4gYCM98AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARmLTIUGB4MXgRQFlE0BgjKBVIgWmQMmgg0cgVOCNoEEAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,494,1432598400"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="12498919"
Received: from rcdn-core-10.cisco.com ([173.37.93.146]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2015 07:34:13 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com [173.37.183.81]) by rcdn-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6H7YDSc028201 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 07:34:13 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.49]) by xhc-rcd-x07.cisco.com ([173.37.183.81]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Fri, 17 Jul 2015 02:34:13 -0500
From: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
To: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast
Thread-Index: AQHQwGL6nNDuJQe3hUu/qRAw6bXwVQ==
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 07:34:13 +0000
Message-ID: <228248C6-94FE-4C9C-A875-F732EFDC6601@cisco.com>
References: <201507071147.t67Bl13m009348@irp-lnx1.cisco.com> <CAO42Z2x7mNFbB_w_+W+80pY+LeCAKXaOBXMmQvkcaMSWhwW60g@mail.gmail.com> <EF21B630-5D0A-415A-A93F-9058900CC80C@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2zAqMXhBZ2wa=q0wtHGhMpMWU9TSjfFyd2quiki9w0oSw@mail.gmail.com> <85CADAA2-8DF2-4A6B-812B-7A77081936F5@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2w3fOxGJHasKqYZRfGZ2u=7FnZBm+jgLtgDvfZ7HYW=iw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2z+DwOin23HQTysrZ9dNP924+LQ-vOExmJc_xZUEB4yCQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO42Z2z+DwOin23HQTysrZ9dNP924+LQ-vOExmJc_xZUEB4yCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.61.71.21]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_193A281E-1488-4601-A1CA-FFD676A2FC7A"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/pF1lUgorDmrk2USayqipeRQjcOs>
Cc: "draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org" <draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast@tools.ietf.org>, v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 07:34:15 -0000

> 
> So the next logical thing to do would be to have the router default to
> unicast Router Advertisements, measure the rate of received Router
> Solicitations, and switch to multicast RA mode past a certain
> threshold to cover this sort of situation. Once the number of RSes
> falls, it switches back to unicast RA mode.
> 
> That would get rid of the configuration knob proposed in this ID, and
> is behaviour that I think could be universal for all link types,
> rather than just for the case of wireless ones with mobile devices.

If it were me implementing it, I think I would go about this in a little different way, hopefully simpler. I would want to send at most one (e.g., either zero or one) RA per some interval (a second?). In the normal case, that is sent unicast. However, having sent a unicast RA at time t, if I now receive another RS before t+1, I send the next one (at time t+1) as a multicast.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email