On Nov 12, 2009, at 18:17 , Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
We do appreciate all the help you gave to polish our model in April,
thanks for that!
And now you're about to remove the link definitions - thanks for
thanking me.
We didn't say that we are going to remove all references to a link. We
haven't decided how to use the autoconf model yet. Obviously we would
need to build around it.
Additionally to AUTOCONF draft being against the 6lowpan-ND definition
of link, and of its first phrase in the Bootstrapping section (are you
going to remove that too?), AUTOCONF draft also requires the
prefixes to
be /128 exclusively. Are you thus going to require /128 prefixes
exclusively too in the 6lowpan-ND document?
As a LoWPAN shares a single prefix, all nodes in a LoWPAN can have is
a an address. We do not talk about assigning prefixes to nodes in this
WG. Routers do advertise the prefix used throughout the LoWPAN (using
RAs). And nodes may then auto-configure addresses based on that.
Are you going to modify the 6lowpan-ND bootstrapping because AUTOCONF
draft requires prefixes /128?
It already works like this, no changes necessary. As far as I can
tell, the autoconf draft requires no functional changes to the base
mechanisms of our work. Again, we still need to look at the details.
Cheers,
Zach
--
http://www.sensinode.com
http://zachshelby.org - My blog “On the Internet of Things”
Mobile: +358 40 7796297
Zach Shelby
Head of Research
Sensinode Ltd.
Kidekuja 2
88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may contain
legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient,
please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your system
without producing, distributing or retaining copies thereof.
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
