Hi Erik, Samita,

Thanks for your draft. This proposal is much closer to what I had in mind
myself and I feel this is a great step forward!

I have a few questions / comments:
- Assumptions: why do you assume that 6LR use RA to configure their global
addresses while host are allowed to use DHCPv6? In IPv6, routers are
typically ignoring received RAs... It is not very clear whether your
proposal allows the case where all addresses (host and 6LR) are assigned
using DHCPv6. It might also be that in a route-over situation the routing
protocol itself would take care of distributing well chosen
prefixes/addresses to allow prefix aggregation in routing tables or routing
messages.
- Is there any relation between the concept of 'node lifetime' and
'reachable time'? Couldn't you achieve the same effect by setting high
values for the reachable time?
- Section 7.3: I feel like you are underestimating the role that the routing
protocol might play. If you take the example of what RPL is defining, an
IPv6 host could very well be a RPL leaf node, in which case it might
discover its default router by listening to DIO messages, and send DAO to
'register'. In addition, if the 6LR are RPL routers that use DHCPv6 or
another scheme for address allocation, RS/RA might be completely disabled.
What do you think?
- Section 7.3: Reading your description, is it correct to say that hosts
perform NUD and address resolution for their default router? (of course the
number of messages is reduced by the heavy use of the SLLA option). Do you
also use NS/NA to perform NUD and address resolution between 6LR? 
- Section 7.3: ND uses already upper-layer protocol feedback. Would you
consider to extend it to include lower layer feedback?

To summarize my comments, I would like to understand a bit better how you
envision the operation of nd-simple when a routing protocol such as RPL is
used on top of it.

Best,
Mathilde


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Erik Nordmark
Sent: lundi, 1. mars 2010 05:17
To: 6lowpan
Subject: [6lowpan] Fwd: New Version Notification
fordraft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-simple-00


Samita and I have tried to capture a minimal set of ND optimizations in this
draft.

    Erik


-------- Original Message --------

A new version of I-D, draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-simple-00.txt
has been successfuly submitted by Erik Nordmark and posted to the IETF
repository.

Filename:        draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-simple
Revision:        00
Title:           IPv6 LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery and Addressing Choices
Creation_date:   2010-03-01
WG ID:           Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 16

Abstract:
IETF 6LoWPAN working group defines IPv6 over low-power personal area network
(IEEE 802.15.4).  IEEE 802.15.4 and other low-power wireless networks have
limited or no usage of broadcast or multicast signaling due to energy
conservation.  Besides the wireless nodes may not strictly follow
traditional concept of IP subnet and IP-links while connecting nodes and
routers.  This document describes simple optimizations to IPv6 Neighbor
Discovery protocol(RFC4861), and addressing mechanisms that are useful for
small scale 6LoWPAN networks in star and mesh topologies.

The optimizations include reducing the amount of Neighbor Discovery
multicast traffic and allowing for a single subnet to span multiple routers
in a "route-over" topology.
 



The IETF Secretariat.


_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

Reply via email to