Samsung phones block WiFi IPv6 when sleeping, delayed notifications

[Lorenzo Colitti]

On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Doug Barton <dougb at dougbarton.email> wrote:

> The problem is that due to the design of the protocol "processing RAs"
> (Note, you did not specify unicast or multicast) is a known battery drainer.


On a phone, the cost of receiving one packet every 10 minutes is
completely. Receiving multicast is cheaper than receiving unicast.


> So it's awesome to say that wireless devices operating on a battery should
> simply stick to the protocol that was designed 15+ years ago when it was
> almost universally true that every networked device was connected to power
> and a LAN cable. But the world has moved on.


What do you suggest? Use another protocol instead? Perhaps DHCPv6, whose
semantics are unchanged since DHCPv4 came out in 1993 and which still has
no deployed mechanism to update hosts with new information?

The device should know if it loses connectivity if it actually, you know,
> loses connectivity. If the router hasn't expired yet it should be able to
> use it. The scenario you describe should be incredibly rare.


In an enterprise that has invested in VRRP and BGP multihoming, perhaps. In
a home network, no.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20150614/3576146b/attachment.html