Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> wrote: >> Not at all. The RPL profile template is at: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-applicability-template/ >> (yes, it's expired, never to be published) >> >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7733/ (section 4) >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8036/ (section 7) >> >> are examples of the RPL profile.
> Great. I thought in Chicago you said you would volunteer converting the
current section
> about Roll profile in ACP spec into that format. Is that offer still
> valid ?
Yes, I'll still do that, but there are some other BRSKI edits that seem to
take priority :-)
>> If we aren't going to depend RPI, we'll need to carefully tweak the RPL
>> parameters so that we get frequent enough announcements. We may be able
to
>> leverage the IPsec DPD messages to detect link down's and do reparent
events
>> though. That should be easily written up in the ACP document.
> Good point. I guess thats details that would go beyond RPL profile.
> Text suggestions welcome, otherwise i'll try to make up something.
That's actually exactly what the RPL Profile addresses.
> Btw: I am very interested to have some more high-available ACP option, but
> that would be even more work, eg: Something like MRT support with RPL.
> Maybe we can discuss in Prague..
What is "MRT" in this context?
>> the IPsec tunnel, it probably looks like:
>>
>> IPll ESP RPI IP ULP
>>
>> With the IPll ESP RPI part being added/removed at each hop. Based upon
20
>> years of building drivers for hardware acceleration, I don't think that
this
>> will matter much to HW accel.
> Well... If i look at the routing requirements that i see:
> - ability to have different NOCs are separate roots
> - ability to have MRTs
> I think i could easier resolve those requirements with (S/M,D) based
> forwarding entries than with IPinIP header fields to specify an instance.
> But i guess that such approaches would be novel for RPL and (see above)
> therefore require more work.
Different NOCs could create different DODAGs, yes, but it requires InstanceIDs.
There may be some other options.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
