RE: WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL61] Remove initial wait

My only comment on this is that the paragraph that would
follow this one in the document should be updated as well,
to indicate something like:

   If during this period, from the beginning of the probing process
   until PROBE_INTERVAL seconds after the last probe packet is sent, the host
   receives any ARP packet

(It previously used "PROBE_MAX" rather than "PROBE_INTERVAL".)

Also, a few paragraphs later:

   If, by PROBE_INTERVAL seconds after the transmission of the last ARP probe
   no conflicting ARP Reply or ARP probe has been received, then the
   host has successfully claimed the desired Link-Local IPv4 address.

(I haven't done any exhaustive review of the document for this
so there could be other spots.)

					-Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On
> Behalf Of Stuart Cheshire
> Sent: Friday, May 07, 2004 12:53 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL61] Remove initial wait
> 
> 
> >I believe it should have been random initial delay + retransmissions
> >spaced 1 seconds apart, rather than what somehow came out in the
> >document.
> >
> >	MikaL
> 
> A long time ago, draft-07 said:
> 
>    When ready to begin probing, the host should then wait for a
>    random time interval selected uniformly in the range zero to two
>    seconds, and should then send four probe packets, spaced two
>    seconds apart. This initial random delay helps ensure that a
>    large number of hosts powered on at the same time do not all send
>    their initial probe packets simultaneously.
> 
> With our new parametrized text, this becomes:
> 
>    When ready to begin probing, the host should then wait for a random
>    time interval selected uniformly in the range zero to START_WAIT
>    seconds, and should then send PROBE_NUM probe packets, spaced
>    PROBE_INTERVAL seconds apart. This initial randomized delay helps
>    ensure that a large number of hosts powered on at the same time do
>    not all send their initial probe packets simultaneously.
> 
> I believe this is perfectly adequate.
> 
> Stuart Cheshire <[email protected]>
>  * Wizard Without Portfolio, Apple Computer, Inc.
>  * www.stuartcheshire.org
> 
>