1 |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Grant Edwards |
2 |
<grant.b.edwards@×××××.com> wrote: |
3 |
> On 2012-01-19, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>>>> Do you really want that much broadcast and wide multicast (think |
6 |
>>>> DNS-SD and NTP in multicast mode) traffic on the same Ethernet |
7 |
>>>> segment? |
8 |
>>> |
9 |
>>> That bit I don't understand. ??It's no worse that ARP, and we seem to |
10 |
>>> live with that quite easily. |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> Not just arp, but actual broadcast/multicast data. If you've ever run |
13 |
>> PulseAudio and enabled network sources and sinks on a couple boxes, |
14 |
>> you might have accidentally discovered an easy way to bring a wireless |
15 |
>> network to its knees. And that's just something I've had personal |
16 |
>> experience with. Come to think of it, that's a good reason I should |
17 |
>> continue to keep my home wired and wireless networks on separate |
18 |
>> subnets, and not simply bridged as I'd done at the time. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> I don't understand what that has to do with L-L address support in |
21 |
> applications. |
22 |
|
23 |
The "Do you really want that much broadcast and wide multicast traffic |
24 |
on the same Ethernet segment" was in the context of having a large |
25 |
network not divided up into separate subnets, which was in the context |
26 |
of how broadcast and multicast traffic can saturate a link scope if |
27 |
the link scope is too large. It was an argument against huge link |
28 |
scopes, not against link-local support. |
29 |
|
30 |
Thinking about it, in your device's case, I suspect you won't want |
31 |
link-local scope to be your only IPv6 address; you'll want either a |
32 |
ULA address or a global-scope address. Otherwise, clients not on the |
33 |
local Ethernet segment won't be able to communicate with it, period; |
34 |
the user of your device would need a proxy sitting on the segment. |
35 |
|
36 |
Something you might think about: Register a ULA subnet, and configure |
37 |
your devices to use it. That would allow the network operators at |
38 |
destination sites to include network routing as a means to |
39 |
restrict/allow access to it. You'll also want to allow configuration |
40 |
of global-scope addresses via RAs and DHCPv6. (Though |
41 |
enabling/disabling that on initial device setup will be interesting; |
42 |
Having a ULA address preconfigured when you ship would be much like |
43 |
one's SOHO router being preconfigured with '192.168.0.220" on its |
44 |
internal interface. You could use LL addresses to bootstrap, too, but |
45 |
you come back to the browser support issue you've run into.) |
46 |
|
47 |
-- |
48 |
:wq |