Re: [dna] Comments on Simple DNA

[Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>]

Hi Jin,
   Thanks for the comments. Please see responses inline.

JinHyeock Choi wrote:
> Dear Suresh & Greg
> 
> Here are the issues I mentioned during Dublin meeting. I post them
> before I lose them.
> 
> 1. Verification of IP address per router.
> Previously DNA relied on link identification. So a host verifies all
> addresses (and IP parameters) at a stroke. However Simple DNA aims to
> verify IP address (and IP parameter) per router. I propose we write
> down the change clearly.

OK. I agree with you about writing down the purpose of simple dna but I 
am not sure if we want to talk about a change. Simple dna has always 
been about this.

> 
> 2. Verification procedure
> I have difficulty grasping the exact verification procedure. If you
> provide pseudocode as Sathya did in Sec 5.2.6.1. of DNAv6, that would
> be of help.

OK.

> 
> 3. Two kinds of IP addresses
> Simple DNA host should keep both operable and valid IPv6 addresses.
> Their meaning are much different, so we'd better take more care with
> the terms such as 'valid' or existing'. For example, in abstract, it's
> written that
> 
>    Detecting Network Attachment allows hosts to assess if its existing
>    addressing or routing configuration is valid for a newly connected
>    network.
> 
> However, I assume, you meant that "host assess whether its addresses
> are operable" because it only have to check prefix lifetime to assess
> whether an address is valid.

Yes. I will will fix this.

> 
> 4. Applicability statement
> Please write down that simple DNA is to optimize for visiting
> previously attached link.

I will propose text to the mailing list for this.

Thanks
Suresh

_______________________________________________
dna mailing list
dna@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dna