Re: [DNA] DNAv6 Review from Mobopts

[JinHyeock Choi <jinchoe@gmail.com>]

> > It may cause some problem for DNA scheme to rely on MAC address as below.
> >
> > First, in certain technology such as 802.16, MAC address is not used
> > for data transfer. In some implementation, when a host performs
> > address resolution to find the router's MAC address, its device driver
> > intercepts the message and provides a bogus MAC address.
>
>  So the device driver is spoofing a response to the Neighbor Solicitation?
>  Won't this cause problems if and when SEND is implemented?

It spoofs a solicitation and just replies the message for itself. NS
message won't go out of a host. It may cause a problem for SEND and
some other cases.

> > Moreover, when a host moves to another subnet/ link, it won't speed up
> > DNA procedure to check whether its existing default router is still
> > reachable. So the scheme will give little help when, IMO, fast DNA is
> > needed the most, i.e. when a host doesn't have a valid address, so
> > should get a new one ASAP.
>
>  Since ND and RS/RA are done simultaneously in simple DNAv6, the completion
>  time is determined by the faster of the two exchanges.  In the case where
> the
>  host doesn't have a valid address, the ND exchanges will fail (no
> response),
>  and the host will obtain an address via the normal RS/RA procedure.

So for handoff cases, DNA performs no better than existing ND. In
other words, DNA contributes little for seamless handoff. I wonder
whether it's an enough improvement.

best regards

JinHyeock