Xavier Vilajosana <[email protected]> wrote: > In the EB, there is an Information Element described in 15.4 > (Synchronization IE) that contains a field named Join Metric (in > version 2012 was named Join Priority). I think would be good to change > the name of the field to avoid any misunderstanding, considering that > this also goes inside an IE in the EB.
okay. So what do you suggest. Would "Proxy Priority" be meaningful enough?
> I have also a question, why not a simple binary option to decide if a
> node accepts Join or not? Having a range and having the nodes calculate
That's what the previous revision had.
Malisa suggested it should be a priority.
Given that a pledge may well see announcements from different parts of the
DODAG, and perhaps even might see announcements from different DODAGs (same
instanceID, perhaps connected via backbone-router draft!), I think that
starting with a priority might be good.
If it turns out this is never useful, we could amend things later to say
that only 1 and 0x7f are useful; but we won't be saving any bytes that way.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
