NIST IPv6 document

Fri Jan 7 01:12:19 UTC 2011

This would break dead-neighbor detection, but, I'm not sure that's necessarily
a problem for end hosts at the local router level.

It is touted as one of the IPv6 features, but, I'm not sure how valuable it is as
a feature.

Owen

On Jan 6, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Marcel Plug wrote:

> Perhaps we're reaching the point where we can say "We don't need an ND
> table for a /64 network".  If the ethernet MAC is embedded in the IPv6
> address, we don't need to discover it because we already know it.  If
> the IPv6 address has been manually configured on a host, perhaps that
> host should now accept traffic directed to the MAC that the lower 64
> bits of the IPv6 address would translate to.
> 
> Perhaps this idea has been discussed somewhere and discarded for its
> flaws, but if not, perhaps it should be :-).
> 
> Marcel
> 
> (First post by the way, go easy on me :-)
> 
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Jack Bates <jbates at brightok.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On 1/6/2011 12:26 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
>>> 
>>> A bunch of very smart people have worked on IPv6 for a very long
>>> time, and justification for /64's was hashed out at extended length
>>> over the period of years.
>> 
>> NDP should have been better designed. It still has the same problems we had
>> with ARP except the address pool has magnified it.
>> 
>> Routers should have 1) better methods for keeping ND tables low (and
>> maintaining only valid entries) or 2) better methods for learning valid
>> entries than unsolicited NDP requests.
>> 
>> This isn't to say the protocol itself is a waste, but it should have taken
>> in the concerns and developed the mitigation controls necessary as
>> recommendations to the implementers.
>> 
>> 
>> Jack
>> 
>> 