I need to correct my stance here, now knowing IEEE 802.15.5 mesh-under
does offer multicast link-layer.
I think when mesh-under is available, multicast link-layer is also
available, and when so the LoWPAN ND should take advantage of it: do the
typical link-scoped multicast operations: join, leave.
I think the '100' described by 4944 "Multicast Address Mapping" should
be known and reserved by IEEE, if it's not already, such that other than
IP protocols don't make group addresses which start with '100'.
And I also suggest to have specific text in LoWPAN ND draft which says
that if mesh-under is available then group ff02::1 maps into 0x8001 and
ff02::2 into 0x8002, and LoWPAN ND should use the link-layer multicast
features if mesh-under is available.
Example specific statement is "LoWPAN node SHOULD or MUST join the group
ff02::1, if mesh-under is available". This expands the current LoWPAN
ND text which says "A LoWPAN Node does not need to join the
solicited-node multicast address for its own addresses and SHOULD NOT
have to answer a multicast Neighbor Solicitation."
What do you think?
Alex
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
