IPv6 "bloat" history

Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Tue Mar 29 08:56:48 UTC 2022

Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:

> I tried exactly what you suggested for IPv6 with RFC 8505 and 8929.
> But to few people in mainstream networks realize what you just said.

I found, theoretically by reading 802.11 specification,
broadcast/multicast reliability problem and reported to
IPv6 WG about 20 years ago. So, I'm pleased to know
that some people recognize it as a real problem and
worked on it. Thank you.

> It started long long ago with the idea to use inverse ARP for the
> registration, I guess it is still doable but I am not optimistic
> about adoption considering that v6 is a lot worse with more addresses
> and DAD.

Aren't IP addresses are assigned from APs? Then, the
APs can construct ARP table without actually running
ARP or inverse ARP, I'm afraid.

> We are editing the piece on proxy ARP at this very moment at .11me.
> APs are indeed supposed to proxy both v4 and v6. What is less clear
> is how they form a deterministic state for that.

An ARP table entry can be created when an IP address is assigned
during registration process and destroyed if the registration is

Or, do I misunderstand anything?

						Masataka Ohta

More information about the NANOG mailing list