Agree 100% on the following message below.

Architecturally, it is clean, portable, compatible with multiple routing
protocols if configuration and bootstrapping mechanisms such as addressing,
context transfer etc. are separated from the functions of a routing
protocol. RPL may be the only protocol being discussed currently at IETF,
but as mentioned previously by others that there are other ad-hoc or IGP
routing protocols that can be tweaked to run on a low-power and lossy
networks for different configurations and applications.

So, I completely disagree that RPL routing protocol carry the bootstrapping
information. 
Also, for easy deployment and initial adoption of the technology, RPL would
be better off if does not make itself complicated by trying to address all
the possible permutation and combination of situations in LLN.

Thanks,
-Samita

> 
> On May 10, 2010, at 11:55, Zach Shelby wrote:
> 
> > We have already agreed that nothing in nd-09 prevents RPL from
> disseminating the PIOs. In fact, it specifically says that if the routing
> protocol does that already, then great. Other routing protocol might need
> the prefix dissemination option in nd-09, thus the spec "stands on its own
> feet". So as far as the 6lowpan WG is concerned there is nothing to
discuss.
> It is up to the ROLL working group to discuss if and how it wants to
> disseminate prefix information to RPL routers.
> 
> +1.
> 
> However, please note also that a LoWPAN needs more information
disseminated
> than the PIOs.
> Unless RPL is extended to carry compression context as well, it seems more
> logical to do all this network configuration dissemination in 6LoWPAN-ND.
> (No, you don't *need* compression context in a LoWPAN, but it gets
> significantly less efficient without it.
> And it breaks spectacularly if the compression context gets inconsistent
> between nodes.)
> 
> Both compression context and prefix information is likely to change on
> relatively slow timescales (days/weeks), which is another reason why it
> seems appropriate to use a configuration protocol for the dissemination of
> both, rather than a routing protocol operating in terms of
seconds/minutes.
> 
> Gruesse, Carsten
> 



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

Reply via email to