OK Then, I'll incorporate and refresh in both draft...
From: 6lo [mailto:6lo-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: vendredi 23 février 2018 00:00
To: email@example.com; Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <r...@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lo] [Roll] A bit for ROLL
Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthub...@cisco.com> wrote:
> I understand that you suggest to reverse the bit from my draft, so
> that it is set by a leaf that does not support its own routing.
> I agree that this minimizes the changes to the existing. But also this
> means that I should change RFC6775-update to specify that.
> I'm happy with that approach and will do it if the WG does not
> disagree. What do others think?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roll [mailto:roll-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: jeudi 22 février 2018 17:57
> To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <r...@ietf.org>
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: Re: [Roll] A bit for ROLL
> Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthub...@cisco.com> wrote:
>> With RPL, and probably any other route-over protocol, there is a need
>> to signal either way, i.e. the node handles its routing (like a
>> classical RPL node) or the node expects that the 6LR will manage the
>> routing on its behalf (like a RPL leaf). The bit is IGP-agnostic, and
>> it applies to any protocol.
>> draft-thubert-roll-unaware-leaves suggests a bit that indicates that
>> the 6LR that is capable to handle its routing should signal it, so the
>> unaware leaf does not need to set it.
> This *is* a new change to existing devices.
>> Q: Should the bit be defined in rfc6775-update as opposed to a ROLL
>> since it is IGP agnostic?
>> Side question: Is it the right approach or should the leaf set the bit
> I think it depends upon whether the leaf is a legacy device.
> We can't just plug a Windows7 PC into an arbitrary 802.15.4 network,
because there generally aren't drivers. So there really isn't a legacy
> We almost always are creating new code, in which case we can create code
which sets a bit which says, "Please manage my routing for me".
> This is not a burden, because such leaf devices do not really exist yet.
> Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -=
IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6
IoT consulting =-
6lo mailing list