HI Pascal,
the bit definition sounds like a 6LO subject.
Handling the bit for RPL like a Roll subject.
makes sense? (did I understand correctly?)
Peter
Pascal Thubert (pthubert) schreef op 2018-02-26 10:24:
Hello Peter
The bit is agnostic to which technique, say RPL but also any routing
protocol or ND proxy is used in the particular environment.
The bit says I’m a plain host, please ensure reachability for the
address I’m registering.
The bit is chosen in that direction for backward compatibility with
RPL.
A plain host that conforms rfc6775 update will always set both the R
and T bits.
Regards,
Pascal
Le 26 févr. 2018 à 09:36, peter van der Stok <[email protected]> a
écrit :
Side question: Is it the right approach or should the leaf set the
bit
instead?
I don't understand how a node, 6LN, that is not aware of RPL can
nevertheless set a bit related to RPL.
I expect the 6LR to do all handling.
Or do I misunderstand the context?
Peter
_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
_______________________________________________
6lo mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
