[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DNA] Issue 3: Remove Subsection 3.2 - Inadequacies in RA information



Dear DNA WG
 
This is an attempt to resolve this issue:
 
Issue 3
Jim Bound proposed to remove
Sub-sec 3.2. Inadequacies in RA information
 
Suggested resolution 
 
At San Diego meeting, WG agreed to remove Sub-sec 3.2, so we reduced
Sub-sec 3.2 to just present the difficulty for a single RA message to
indicate a link change. We propose to change Sub-sec 3.2 (after we remove
Sec 2, this will be Sub-sec 2.2) as below.
 
 
3.2  Link identity detection with a single RA
 
Usually a host gets the information necessary for IP configuration
from RA messages. Based on the current definition [ND], it's difficult
for a host to check for link change upon a single RA reception.
 
To detect link identity, a host may compare the informations in an RA,
for example router address or prefixes, with the existing ones. 
 
The host may use a router address to check for link change. But the
router address in the source address field of an RA is link-local
scope, so its uniqueness is not guaranteed out side of a link. So if it
happens that two different router interfaces have the same link-local
address, the host can't detect that it has moved from one interface
to another by checking the router address in RA messages.
 
Or the host may check whether an incoming RA includes the currently
stored prefix. But an unsolicited RA message can omit some prefixes
for convenience [4]. Hence, the host can't be sure that the existing
prefix is not supported on the currently attached link, even though the
prefix is not contained in a received RA.
 
The set of all the global prefixes assigned to a link can represent a link
identity. But it's not easy for a host to attain and retain all the prefixes
with certainty, so the prefix list based DNA scheme needs further
investigation [CPL].
 
 
Please register your opinion if you have any comments, otherwise
we'll update the goals draft accordingly and move it forward.
 
Thanks to Greg's kind work, we now have the issue list at
 
http://ctieware.eng.monash.edu.au/twiki/bin/view/DNA/DNAGoals
 
Thanks for your kind consideration.
 
Best Regards
 
JinHyeock