Re: draft-cerveny-bmwg-ipv6-nd
"Marius Georgescu" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.bmwg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hello Bill, Regarding DAD, I was thinking something like DAD Delay (time during which the Tentative Address is not usable) can be considered a performance benchmark. An analytical performance study for the most popular DAD strategies is presented in: <http://www.researchgate.net/publication/4316259_Fast_Duplicate_Address_Detection_for_Mobile_IPv6> http://www.researchgate.net/publication/4316259_Fast_Duplicate_Address_Detection_for_Mobile_IPv6 Best regards, Marius Georgescu From: Cerveny, Bill [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 9:26 PM To: Marius Georgescu Cc: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [bmwg] draft-cerveny-bmwg-ipv6-nd Hi Marius, Thanks for your comments. I had been reluctant to expand the scope beyond that described by RFC6583, at least partially to keep the document focused and perhaps to help expedite the document's publication. A question I have though ... what performance benchmarks would there be for DAD or NUD? One of the challenges we've had regarding draft-cerveny-bmwg-ipv6-nd is to confirm that the tests are reporting performance and not compliance ... Thanks, Bill Cerveny On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Marius Georgescu <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: I think this draft is a very good initiative and I support its adoption. I also have a question/comment. I understand that the draft is targeting the ND resilience problems described by RFC6583. However, I was wondering if it wouldn’t be beneficial to add benchmarking tests that can cover the performance of some other functions of ND devices (as presented in RFC4861), such as: Duplicate Address Detection (may be very useful for mobile IPv6) or Neighbor Unreachability Detection. Best regards, Marius Georgescu On Mar 1, 2015, at 5:55, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > Hi Bill and Ron, > > I made some time to read your latest update on a plane ride. > This draft seems to have a few areas for further > development, but otherwise in very good shape. > > I attach my comments, > Al > (as a participant) > > > > <draft-cerveny-bmwg-ipv6-nd-06review.txt>_______________________________________________ > bmwg mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg _______________________________________________ bmwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg