> It seems that we have a reasonable consensus in this thread 
> to do exactly that in RPL anyway...
> 
> Pascal

OK,
So could someone with the full overview outline explain to me
how many mechanisms a RPL node running over 6lowPan will have
to implement to be compatible with all other nodes claiming
to be RPL compliant?

My guess:
* Classic RS/RA
* DHCPv6
* 6lowPAN ND
* RPL address assignment
* etc

Should we make a decision someday? (!)

Thanks,
  Anders

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On 
> Behalf Of Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
> Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 09:01
> To: [email protected]; Richard Kelsey
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Roll] how does a node get an IP address
> 
> Hi Zach:
> 
> I have yet to review the new ND-09 but my guts tell me that 
> it is the wrong place to do the job. Router to router is 
> usually routing protocol land and ND is definitely not a 
> routing protocol.
> 
> The main question is how long can  a router advertise a 
> prefix, and the answer is, as long as it is in the same 
> subnet of an authoritative router that owns the prefix.
> Asserting the continuous reachability of the authoritative 
> router is a routing protocol problem. Maintaining a subnet 
> together is the job for a new form of Gateway Protocol, a 
> Subnet Gateway Protocol RPL is just that.
> 
> Let see:
> 
> - Propagating the RA content is not an ND intrinsic  problem, 
> it only comes with route over. And route over comes with a 
> routing protocol.
> - the route over protocol should be able to tie the route 
> over subnetwork together so it is a SGP.
> 
> So why can't we just say in 6LoWPAN ND that you for those who 
> use it in route over we expect an SGP to tie the route over 
> subnetwork together and that the SGP should transport the RA 
> content, maintaining the validity with the reachability of 
> the authoritative router? I can write that text if you wish.
> 
> It seems that we have a reasonable consensus in this thread 
> to do exactly that in RPL anyway...
> 
> Pascal
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of
> > [email protected]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 10:36 PM
> > To: Richard Kelsey
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Roll] how does a node get an IP address
> > 
> > Hi Everyone,
> > 
> > Let me jump into this thread - just to make things more interesting
> ;-) First, I
> > recommend everyone goes and reads 6lowpan-nd-09 which was submitted 
> > today. When it comes to ND, you need to separate two interfaces.
> > 
> > 1. The host-router interface
> > 
> > Hosts know absolutely nothing about RPL (nor should they). Thus in
> this case
> > ND* does the job, and RS/RA is used for obtaining a prefix and
> initializing its
> > addresses. I think some people in the thread are referring to this.
> > 
> > 2. The router-router interface
> > 
> > As in RFC4861, in 6lowpan-nd-09 routers have more flexibility than
> hosts in
> > how they obtain prefix information (among other things). nd-09 does
> include
> > an optional technique for an authorative border router to 
> disseminate
> PIOs
> > and CIOs (Context Information Options) between the border router and
> all
> > routers in the LoWPAN using RAs. It is actually a decent 
> mechanism and 
> > improved over early versions. The draft clearly states that it is
> optional as a
> > routing algorithm may already do this. So Pascal is correct in that
> respect. I
> > haven't followed the thread well enough to have an opinion if RPL
> should do
> > that.
> > 
> > Routers will also find other features of 6lowpan-nd-09 useful, for
> example
> > during initial bootstrapping, to maintain their default router and
> neighbor
> > caches, avoid the need for address resolution, and to 
> perform NUD. The 
> > draft (tries to) clearly state when features are required 
> or optional
> for a
> > router.
> > 
> > Zach
> > 
> > 
> > >> From: Michael Richardson <[email protected]>
> > >> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:38:47 -0400
> > >>
> > >> >>>>> "Richard" == Richard Kelsey <[email protected]>
> writes:
> > >>     >> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 14:18:32 +0200 From: 
> "Pascal Thubert
> > >>     >> (pthubert)" <[email protected]>
> > >>     >>
> > >>     >> The question here is that the authoritative 
> routers need to
> > >>     >> disseminate the PIO (and the RIO) to all routers in the
> subnet.
> > >>
> > >>     Richard> How do other routing protocols (OSPF, IS-IS, AODV,
> OLSR)
> > >>
> > >> I can only speak for OSPF and ISIS.
> > >> Neither deal with multi-hop subnets or with any kind of address 
> > >> assignment.
> > >
> > > Why should RPL be any different?  Yes, it will be run on 
> multi-hop 
> > > subnets, but I still do not see how this affects the routing.
> > >
> > >> Both were written when multicast was very new.
> > >
> > > I am not sure how RPL's handling of multicast matters here.
> > > While RPL is required to route multi-hop multicasts, ND uses 
> > > link-local multicasts, which do not require routing.
> > >
> > >> Richard> I understand that multi-hop subnets are a 
> problem for ND, 
> > >> Richard> but I don't see how the routing protocol is affected.
> > >>
> > >> RPL either requires 6lowpan, or it doesn't.
> > >
> > > RPL should work fine with ordinary ND.  Why would it require
> 6lowpan?
> > >
> > >> If it doesn't, then it has to provide for ND to work, or for
> another
> > >> protocol to replace it.
> > >
> > > ND works fine, using link-local, one-hop multicasts.  RPL need not
> be
> > > involved.
> > >
> > > If someone wants to run RPL on a node that uses neither 
> ordinary ND
> or
> > > 6lowpan's version, then they will need some third variety 
> of ND.  I
> do
> > > not see why this is an issue for RPL to address.  It 
> seems quite out 
> > > of scope.
> > >
> > >                               -Richard Kelsey 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Roll mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Roll mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> 
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

Reply via email to