Re: [DNA] Re: LinkID v.s. Landmark Prefix

[Greg Daley <Greg.Daley@eng.monash.edu.au>]

Hi Subba, 

----- Original Message -----
[cut]
> >
> > In this case, no change will be detected upon arrival to
> > link M, and the previous prefix will remain configured.
> >
> 
> I am just giving one example, where H may not take wrong decision.
[cut]

I understand that LinkID is quite robust against change.

The point I originally was making was that while it is robust,
All of the schemes are flawed to some extent.

Some of the strategies described in LinkID (timers, etc)
are applicable to all schemes, and would probably be adopted
in any of the schemes now.

So the question is: Is the problem big enough that the 
advantage of advertising oldLinkID, gains significantly
over the other schemes (when timeouts and prefix retraction
advertisement are recommended)? 

Are the other schemes good enough?

I don't expect there are clear answers which everyone agrees
with, but it may be possible to discuss things until
we agree about the comparison.

Greg