Please look at the replies below.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: gabriel montenegro [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 1:52 AM
> To: Ki-Hyung Kim; 'Samita Chakrabarti'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [6lowpan] format document issues
> 
> Prof Kim,
> 
> This is great: results!
> 
> Q1: Are these experimental or simulation results?
That is simulation results.
About the Q1:
Currently, we are implementing the formatting document and LOAD on a sensor
platform.
After finishing the implementation, the experimental results will be
available.

> Q2: Did you use the handling rules as per the draft, or did you modify the
> link-layer source address at every hop, as implied by your post a while
back?
I didn't change anything of the format document on the simulation. Also the
link-layer source address is changed at every hop as everybody expected.


> 
> -gabriel
> 
> --- Ki-Hyung Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > Sorry for this late reply on this issue about the source address
> compression
> > in multi-hop environment.
> > After raising this issue in August, our research group has studied on
> the
> > reporting of RERRs to the originators without a source address and a
> > precursor list.
> > The purpose of the research is to search a light weight RERR reporting
> > scheme without putting a source address in the format and maintaining
> > precursor lists on routing tables of every nodes.
> >
> > If I say the conclusion first, the source address is at least not
> required
> > in the 6lowpan format for reporting RERRs to the originators.
> >
> > In AODV, every intermediate node on a routing path keeps a precursor
> list on
> > each routing entry for a destination. The setting up of the precursor
> list
> > is done when processing RREQ and RREP.
> > Thus, data packets do not need to have the originator address in AODV.
> >
> > What about 6lowpan?
> > If a routing scheme of 6lowpan maintains precursor lists for routing as
> AODV
> > does, data packets at least do not need to have the originator address.
> > This issue could be handled in the routing documents.
> >
> > Currently, we have submitted a paper to a conference about the RERR
> > reporting schemes.
> > In the paper, we have proposed and evaluated several RERR reporting
> schemes
> > including 1) unicasting a RERR back in one-hop only, 2) broadcasting
> > backward a RERR in one-hop only, 3) broadcasting backward based on the
> > routing table information, 4) using precursor lists, and 5) using the
> > originator address if it is assumed to be added to the 6lowpan format
> > document.
> >
> > In the preliminary performance evaluation result, (1) has shown the best
> > result, and then (4) comes next in terms of the communication
throughput.
> > Also (1) showed the minimal implementation complexity.
> >
> > The detailed description of the schemes and performance results shall be
> > shown shortly.
> >
> > --
> > Ki-Hyung Kim
> > Associate Professor
> > Division of Information and Computer Eng., Ajou University
> > Wonchun-Dong, Yeongtong-Gu, Suwon, Korea 442-749
> > Tel: +82-31-219-2433, Cel: +82-17-760-2551,  Fax: +82-31-219-1811
> > http://ilab.ajou.ac.kr/kkim86/index.htm
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf
> > > Of gabriel montenegro
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 10:02 AM
> > > To: Samita Chakrabarti; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; itijibox-
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: [6lowpan] format document issues
> > >
> > > Samita,
> > >
> > > --- Samita Chakrabarti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >  Thus, the format document can save one address field (for
> originator
> > > source
> > > >  link-layer addr) by requiring the routing protocol to provide
> > > information
> > > >  on originator address so that the intermediate node can setup
> reverse
> > > route.
> > > >  Alternately, the intermediate node will have to do route-discovery
> for
> > > the
> > > >  originator - that is certainly not effecient.
> > > >  Hope this clarifies the point.
> > >
> > > I *think* we're repeating each other. From my post:
> > >
> > > > But of course, routing protocols like AODV or LOAD don't use the M
> bit,
> > > > they have
> > > > originator and destination address fields within the RREQ.
> > >
> > > So we don't even have to require "the routing protocol to provide
> > > information
> > > on originator address so that the intermediate node can setup reverse
> > > route."
> > > The required info is already in the RREQ, right?
> > >
> > > -gabriel
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 6lowpan mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
> >
> >


_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

Reply via email to