Yatch, Hmm, good point. I'm with you that have SF0 be independent from higher layer stuff is the right design approach.
But SF0 doesn't really offer any API for upper-layers (it would be against its "minimal" nature). Could we say something to the effect that, if SF0 realizes connection to a particular neighbor is no longer needed (for example a change in parent by the routing protocol) SF0 MAY send CLEAR requests to neighbor to speed up the cleanup process of the cells with that neighbors? Thomas On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 1:08 PM, Yasuyuki Tanaka < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Sending an explicit CLEAR will speed things up, and avoid for the >> previous preferred parent to waste energy listening to those. A >> CLEAR wouldn't hurt, right? >> > > This is right. But, I don't think it's a SF0 job. The thing is that > SF0 knows nothing about RPL. > > If SF0 provided an API to send CLEAR to a particular neighbor, RPL > could trigger the CLEAR request to a previous preferred parent on its > parent switch, I guess. > > Best, > Yatch > > -- _______________________________________ Thomas Watteyne, PhD Research Scientist & Innovator, Inria Sr Networking Design Eng, Linear Tech Founder & co-lead, UC Berkeley OpenWSN Co-chair, IETF 6TiSCH www.thomaswatteyne.com _______________________________________
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
