Hi Alex, Regarding routers with one interface, it is true that regarding usual practice and deployments, it is new. However conceptually, a router is usually defined as "a node that forwards IP packets not explicitly addressed to itself". To the best of my knowledge, this is what RFCs assume when they use the router concept. Hence we should not run into problems nor need to modify standards to support the one interface scenario. Do you see scenarios / implementations where having one interface will break something?
Best, Julien -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Alexandru Petrescu Sent: mercredi 29 avril 2009 16:10 To: Dominik Kaspar Cc: 6lowpan Subject: Re: [6lowpan] About definitions in draft-ietf-6lowpan-usecases-02 Dominik Kaspar a écrit : > Hi Alex, > > Thanks for sharing your definitions on LoWPAN terminology. I agree > with you that the current definition of "LoWPAN Mesh Node" is > incomplete. We must point out that it is a general term which includes > both a LoWPAN Host or a LoWPAN Router. Ok. > The link definition of RFC4861 is indeed useful. For the Use Cases > draft, we will follow the changes in the ND draft on what a "LoWPAN > Link" is. Which is? > It might be nit-picky, but didn't you mean "IP forwarding" when you > defined "IP routing"? I was thinking of it being both forwarding and routing. ("IP routing The act performed by a router - inspecting the dst IP address of an incoming packet, longest-prefix matching it to the first field of each entry in a table of triolets [dst,prefixlength,nexthop] IP addresses and transmitting it to the identified nexthop. In the process, neither the src nor the dst IP addresses of the packet are ever modified. It has two ore more interfaces, each interface of the router has a different IP link-local scope.") I wrote IP "routing" more to distinguish it from the immediately previous "MAC forwarding" because I think some people said here that MAC forwarding is different than IP routing... but I don't think anybody said how is it different. > And I disagree with your statement that "it has two or more > interfaces, each interface of the router has a different IP link-local > scope." I think that LoWPAN nodes mostly likely won't have more than a > single physical network interface... I agree that LoWPAN nodes seem likely to have a single interface. But this is new and different! A typical router doing IP routing, has more than one interface. Alex _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
