RE: [DNA] Comment on draft-jinchoi-dna-goals-00

["S. Daniel Park" <soohong.park@samsung.com>]

> We were not entirely happy about the term 'L3 link' and, in 
> mailing list, contemplated the alternatives. But we couldn't find an 
> appropriate one in time. We may change the term later, if suitable 
> one appears. 

I see.

> > [3] 
> > >1) Link local scope of Router Address  
> > >So if it happens that two different router interfaces have the 
> > >same link-local address, a host can't detect that it has 
> > >moved from one interface to another by checking the router 
> > >address in Router Advertisement messages. 
> > 
> > I don't think above case is a real model, why two different router
> > interfaces are used with the same MAC ? did you have any 
> > experience on that ?
> 
> Link-local not link-layer. 

Um... same link-local address is generated from same MAC if they 
make use of EUI-64 format described in 2462. I am not sure it is a 
problem for DNA. Seems like a network mis-configuration by
administrator...
Am I missing anything ? 

> I didn't consider renumbering case. It seemed to me out of DNA 
> scope to deal with renumbering related problems.  

Well, renumbering is a general consideration in the IPv6 especially
Neighbor Discovery Protocol not specific case in anywhere.


Regards


- Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
- Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.