Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>:

Nick Hilliard wrote:

...

...

Thus, protocols heavily depending on broadcast/multicast, such as ND, will suffer.

ok, you've trolled me enough to ask why ND is worse than ARP on a wavelan network - in your humble opinion?

Because, with IPv4:

1) broadcast/multicast from a STA attacked to an AP is actually unicast to the AP and reliably received by the AP (and relayed unreliably to other STAs). That is, a broadcast ARP request from the STA to the AP is reliably received by the AP.

2) the AP knows MAC and IP addresses of STAs

3) ARP and DHCP replies are usually unicast

ARP and DHCP usually work.

For an unusual case of ARP for other STAs, collisions do increase initial latencies, but as refreshes are attempted several times, there will be no latter latencies.

OTOH, IPv6 requires many multicast received by STAs: RA and NS for DAD, for example.

Worse, minimum intervals of ND messages are often very large, which means a lot of delay occurs when a message is lost.

Masataka Ohta