Samita, > When are you planning to publish the next revision of this draft?
Obviously, you have to refer a new version here; http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-daniel-6lowpan-load-adhoc-routing-01.txt which is updating what you are refering... Regards, Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park) Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2005 7:02 AM Subject: [6lowpan] lowpan-aodv draft comments > Hello Gabriel and Nandu: > > I have recently reviewed draft-montenegro-lowpan-aodv-00. > > Here are some questions and comments: > > * DYMO would be replacing AODV in future. Are we working on > AODV lowpan because of Zigbee compatibility or because > availability of experimental RFC3561 ? > > * The draft refers to *aodvbis*, but the aodvbis draft has expired. > Is there a plan for aodvbis draft to make progress for another RFC? > If that is not the case, then I am happy to see that this draft defines > the aodvbis format in this draft and go forward as 'lowpan-aodv' protocol. > Otherwise, we should follow either RFC3561 format or DYMO format. > > * The lowpan-aodv draft requires only RREQ and RREP for control data. > How about RERR for propagating error messages back to the sender ? > AFAIK, the L2 ACK failure may detect a link failure in the intermediate > node during a data transfer, should not it send an error message back > to the sender(previous node) of the packet ? > Should the intermediate node do route repairing on behalf of the > sender node? > > * Also, aodvbis or dymo appends intermediate node information at each > hop with the RREQ and RREP control packet. This increases the length > of the control packet unnecessarily. In IEEE802.15.4 network, these > additional bits are undesirable, as we know. It is a good idea that > lowpan-aodv draft recommends not to use additional path node information > on the RREQ and recommends APN-count to be zero in the RREP. > > * The lowpan-aodv draft also needs to discuss Hostid size field values > for lowpan. > > > Thanks, > -Samita > > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > > _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
