Re: comments on draft-ietf-v6ops-v6inixp-01.txt

[Roque Gagliano <roque@lacnic.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

martin,

this is excellent material, not only for the IXP document but also on  
how ND is handled in practice.

referring to the next version of the document, I was thinking in add  
the following comment when I talk about solicited-node multicast  
addresses:

solicited-node multicast groups.

"Depending on the addressing plan selected by the IXP, each solocited- 
node multicast group may be shared by a sub-set of participants'  
caused by how the last three octects of the addresses are selected.  
In  example 1 in Section 3, only participants with ASNs with the same  
two last digits are going to share the same solocited-node multicast  
group."

However, your test show that it may not make a difference in router  
resources consumption, depending on implementations.

what do you think?

Roque.



On Aug 25, 2009, at 8:50 AM, Martin Pels wrote:

> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 13:25:46 +0100
> Nick Hilliard <nick@inex.ie> wrote:
>
> > On 30/07/2009 16:50, Martin Pels wrote:
> > > We've had a couple of students research this.
> >
> > Sounds interesting.  Are the results of this work publicly available?
>
> http://staff.science.uva.nl/~delaat/sne-2008-2009/p23/report.pdf
>
> Kind regards,
> Martin

- -------------------------------------------------------------
Roque Gagliano
LACNIC
roque@lacnic.net
GPG Fingerprint: E929 06F4 D8CD 2AD8 9365  DB72 9E4F 964A 01E9 6CEE

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkqYIo4ACgkQnk+WSgHpbO7UyACfeu9fHz4loGDOGjjXVO1EJwuK
Sq8AniiUP6UTKvR1vk9Iwdm7NPTWl+17
=PSj1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----