Neighbor Unreachability Detection is too impatient
draft-ietf-6man-impatient-nud-06

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (6man WG)
Last updated 2013-06-13 (latest revision 2013-04-24)
Replaces draft-nordmark-6man-impatient-nud
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Ole Trøan
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2013-02-18)
IESG IESG state Approved-announcement to be sent::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD Brian Haberman
IESG note Ole Troan is the document shepherd.
Send notices to 6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-impatient-nud@tools.ietf.org
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - No Actions Needed
6MAN WG                                                      E. Nordmark
Internet-Draft                                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Updates: 4861 (if approved)                                 I. Gashinsky
Intended status: Standards Track                                  Yahoo!
Expires: October 26, 2013                                 April 24, 2013

           Neighbor Unreachability Detection is too impatient
                  draft-ietf-6man-impatient-nud-06.txt

Abstract

   IPv6 Neighbor Discovery includes Neighbor Unreachability Detection.
   That function is very useful when a host has an alternative neighbor,
   for instance when there are multiple default routers, since it allows
   the host to switch to the alternative neighbor in short time.  This
   time is 3 seconds after the node starts probing by default.  However,
   if there are no alternative neighbors, this is far too impatient.
   This document specifies relaxed rules for Neighbor Discovery
   retransmissions that allow an implementation to choose different
   timeout behavior based on whether or not there are alternative
   neighbors.  This document updates RFC 4861.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on October 26, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of

Nordmark & Gashinsky    Expires October 26, 2013                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            NUD is too impatient                April 2013

   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Definition Of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   3.  Protocol Updates  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.  Example Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Nordmark & Gashinsky    Expires October 26, 2013                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft            NUD is too impatient                April 2013

1.  Introduction

   IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [RFC4861] includes Neighbor Unreachability
   Detection (NUD), which detects when a neighbor is no longer
   reachable.  The timeouts specified for NUD are very short (by default
   three transmissions spaced one second apart).  These short can be
   appropriate when there are alternative neighbors to which the packets
   can be sent.  For example, if a host has multiple default routers in
   its Default Router List, or if the host has a Neighbor Cache Entry
   (NCE) created by a Redirect message.  In these cases, when NUD fails,
   the host will try the alternative neighbor; the next router in the
   Default Router List, or discard the NCE which will also send using a
   different router.

   The timeouts specified in [RFC4861] were chosen to be short in order
   to optimize for the scenarios where alternative neighbors are
   available.

   However, when there is no alternative neighbor there are several
   benefits in making NUD try probing for a longer time.  One of those
   benefits is to make NUD more robust against transient failures, such
   as spanning tree reconvergence and other layer 2 issues that can take
   many seconds to resolve.  Marking the NCE as unreachable in that case
   causes additional multicast on the network.  Assuming there are IP
Show full document text