Hi Anders,Totally agree. From a bootstrapping point of view, in my mind there is no distinction between host and router. You could argue that if a network is formed dynamically, natural RA propagation in the forming tree structure might be enough if the first node is the ABR. However, I think there also needs to be a mechanism to propagate options throughout the network generally. For this piece, and I stress this piece *only*, I believe that ND is probably not the right place to specify this.
Robert Robert Cragie (Pacific Gas & Electric) Gridmerge Ltd. 89 Greenfield Crescent, Wakefield, WF4 4WA, UK +44 (0) 1924 910888 http://www.gridmerge.com <http://www.gridmerge.com/> On 06/05/2010 9:49 AM, Anders Brandt wrote:
Let me try one more time: How much of this will I have to implement to be compliant with other LLN/RPL nodes? In a home control/building environment, the notion of a router nodes is rather artificial. I may have _host_nodes_. They are host nodes because they are sleeping (battery operated) and therefore they cannot participate in routing. They still have to get an IP address to talk to other IP hosts. Alternatively, I may have combined _host&router_nodes_ which serve a purpose application-wise and at the same time happen to be routing resources. Do these hosts have to use another way of getting IP addresses just because they happen to be able to do routing? > From a designer's standpoint it does not seem quite elegant that I have to do use different methods depending on the power model for my node. Am I missing something here? Thanks, Anders-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 10:04 To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) Cc: ROLL WG; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [6lowpan] RPL aware hosts (Re: [Roll] how does a node get an IPaddress) On May 6, 2010, at 09:02, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:enable RPL aware hostsShould we? (Obviously, if a node really needs to know about RPL, it can always become a router.) If I understand you correctly, this is about hosts selecting a specific RPL instance-ID for outgoing traffic. Traditionally, IP has used the TOS byte (Traffic Class in IPv6) to select between different behaviors of the forwarding system. What is it that the host wants to say by selecting a specific RPL instance ID? Why can't the router make that selection, e.g. based on the Traffic Class and the destination address? (Another interesting question is, for incoming traffic, how a host selects which instances it wants to be part of. Is that even a useful thing to do? Would that selection be made by the host, by its first-hop router, or by some configuration agent?) It would be useful to get more information about how instance-IDs are intended to be used with RPL. On the protocol side: If there really is something that a host needs to know about RPL-specific information (instances or whatever), this could be delivered in an ND option that could very well be defined in an RPL-related document, no need to define it in 6LoWPAN-ND. Another way to set up this information would be to configure it during commissioning or using a host configuration protocol like DHCP. Gruesse, Carsten _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan_______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
