Dominik, I agree on your proposed changes, except deleting R17. I would like to be careful to delete it. The requirement is added from comment. Can we think more if it is really not necessary requirement or if we can rephrase it?
-eunah On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Dominik Kaspar <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear list, > > In the attempt of resolving issue #1, I came accross the following > references to PAN coordinators: > > (1) > > In order to ease routing table updates and reduce error control > messages, it would be helpful if nodes leaving the network > inform their coordinator about their intention to disassociate. > > proposed change: > > In order to ease routing table updates, reduce their size, and > minimize error control messages, nodes leaving the network may > announce their disassociation to the closest edge router. > > (2) > > [R17] In case there are one or more nodes allocated to coordinator > roles, the coordinators MAY take the role of keeping track of node > association and de-association within the LoWPAN. > > proposed change: delete R17 > > (3) > > [R18] If the routing protocol functionality includes enabling IP > multicast, then it may want to employ coordinator roles, if any, as > relay points of group-targeting messages instead of using link-layer > multicast (broadcast). > > proposed change: > > [R17] If the routing protocol functionality includes enabling IP > multicast, then it may want to employ relay points of group-targeting > messages instead of using link-layer multicast (broadcast). > > I've committed the proposed changes into the SVN repository. > > Best regards, > Dominik > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 4:03 PM, 6lowpan issue tracker > <[email protected]> wrote: >> #1: Make sure interface to 15.4 is clearly defined >> ----------------------------------+----------------------------------------- >> Reporter: [email protected] | Owner: [email protected] >> Type: defect | Status: assigned >> Priority: major | Milestone: >> Component: routing-requirements | Version: >> Severity: Active WG Document | Resolution: >> Keywords: | >> ----------------------------------+----------------------------------------- >> >> Comment(by [email protected]): >> >> - We should pay attention to whether we are assuming just 802.15.4 frame >> format or the whole 802.15.4 protocol (including MAC features). >> >> -- >> Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/1#comment:2> >> 6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 6lowpan mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan >> > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
