Pere - Please see my comments inline. > This initial draft DYMO-low-routing-00 expired last April 15, without no > reference since its publication in this list. The only reference was > some discussion on list stating the benefits offered by DYMO. The only > reference in this list was a brief discussion to determine the advantages > among the above mentioned protocol and the solution offered by LOAD, without > any technical discussion that brings over of its functionality and > specifications. Is there any interest on continuing ther work with Dymo-low ?
This item is beyond a scope existing 6lowpan charter at this stage. That will be taken care of a rechartering. After then, we will begin a real work. Still, it is not mature status at all. So, please be patient at a moment. > Also I would like to give some comments related to the above mentioned > protocol considering inaccuracies with the usage of sequence numbers. > draft-montenegro-6lowpan-dymo-low-routing-00 (Section 4.7 ): > This section states that the sequence numbers follow DYMO's > directives, nevertheless in the definition of the Routing Table structure > lacks > on a specific field to store information relative to the above mentioned > parameter. As well I think it should be most accurately described on the way > they should be used. > > As well, is there any directive on how to add sequence numbers on LOAD specs? > last comments point out that this functionality should be necessary > to prevent routing loops if we want to use local repair functionality Same above. We also have several issues to be resolved by 6lowpan discussion from our evaluation led by Prof. Ki-Hyung Kim. I will catch up with your comments soon. Anyway, thanks your comment and interest. Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park) Mobile Convergence Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics. _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
