> Again, these protocols are already adaptations of any of the above, right? > So I'm not sure they'll create hard dependencies. In other words, within the > LOAD document, AODV should perhaps appear as an informational reference. > It is not a normative reference because implementing AODV per the RFC > is not a pre-requisite for this to work and be interoperable. Actually, > implementing it won't help lowpan meshing, cuz AODV per the RFC uses UDP > as transport, whereas LOAD (or any other mesh for lowpan protocol) uses > the lowpan adaptation layer as transport. So one could argue that the > AODV RFC (or AODV-bis draft) is not normative, so it wouldn't tie LOAD > in the publication process. But we're *very* far from that problem so > I wouldn't worry about it yet.
Please make sure what implications are described in LOAD. <snip> 3. Overview This section describes the distinctive features of LOAD compared to AODV. LOAD is defined to be operating on top of the adaptation layer instead of the transport layer. <snip> Regards, Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park) Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics. _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
