#111: IESG comment #20 (by Adrian Farrel) - Support of MAC addresses for Mesh
Under
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Reporter: carle...@… | Owner:
Type: task | Status: closed
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: routing-requirements | Version:
Severity: - | Resolution: fixed
Keywords: |
------------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Changes (by carle...@…):
* status: new => closed
* resolution: => fixed
Comment:
RFC 4944 defines the concept of mesh under. Mesh Under uses MAC addresses,
and [R15] explains a requirement for mesh under scenario, which is a
consequence of RFC 4944.
The text didn’t say “MAC addresses” but just say “16-bit short and 64-bit
addresses”, not to hide something but because we thought it was implicit
in the text.
As it seems that [R15] may cause some confusion, we tried to modify the
text to make it clearer as follows:
[R15] For Mesh Under, the forwarding mechanisms MUST support 16-bit short
and 64-bit extended MAC addresses.
-----------------------
About the comment of routing for non-IP addresses, Yes, IETF does not
normally work with routing for non-IP addresses, and this requirement does
NOT imply that IETF should work for MAC address solution in 6LoWPAN. The
WG made a consensus to include the Mesh Under scenario not only Route Over
in this document as this is not a solution document but a requirement
document. Most of 6LoWPAN documents are considering both of mesh under and
route over (again which is a consequence of RFC 4944), and so this
document does as well.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/trac/ticket/111#comment:1>
6lowpan <http://tools.ietf.org/6lowpan/>
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
