+1 Robert
On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Acee Lindem <[email protected]>wrote: > Hey JP, > > On Oct 3, 2011, at 10:01 AM, JP Vasseur wrote: > > > > > On Sep 28, 2011, at 5:43 PM, Fred Baker wrote: > > > >> > >> On Sep 28, 2011, at 5:58 PM, Mark Townsley wrote: > >> > >>> Since you asked, *I* think that a homenet has functional overlap (what > I called "at least a smaller and slightly different subset" in my email) in > terms of requirements to LLNs. At first blush, it looks like RPL has lots of > functionality - perhaps more than we really need for homenet, and by your > own admission more than you need for LLN's - but will hold reservation on > what I think best fits the bill until we see Fred's analysis, hear from > others, etc. > >> > >> My two yen, which may be all it's worth... > >> > >> If I were a Linksys/D-Link/NetGear/* product manager asking about what > protocols to put in, I wouldn't be asking about what still exists in > Internet Drafts and is thought by the engineers designing it to be better > than sliced bread, but about what was inexpensive to implement, likely to be > close to bug-free, and definitively accomplished the goal. I note that most > routers for the IPv4 residential routing marketplace implement RIPv2; I know > of one that implements no routing protocol, one that implements RIPv2 and > RIPv1 (!), and one that implements RIPv2 and OSPF (don't ask which they are, > I don't remember). This is from a google search of residential routers a few > months ago and covered perhaps 20 products from half as many vendors. So my > first inclination is to say that for a residential IPv6 network, RIPng is > probably an image match for those vendors. > >> > >> I have a personal bias in the direction of OSPF or IS-IS; I think that > once the code is debugged, SPF-based protocols are more stable (no > count-to-infinity), given a reasonable set of defaults generate far more > stable networks, and definitively know when there is more than one router on > a LAN, which can be important in subnet distribution. > > > > I spent enough years on OSPF and ISIS to agree with you that these > protocols are well proven, widely deployed with the number of > > recent improvements (MTR, fast convergence, …) to name a few are > particularly appealing. But before choosing a routing protocol > > the first step consists of listing the requirements. In LLN, as you > rightly pointed out, "smart objects" have a set of constraints in terms > > of resources … far from where we are on traditional routers … Thus I > would strongly encourage to list the set of requirements for this > > type of devices before making any sort of selection on the routing > protocol of choice, taking into account where we will be in a few years > > when the number of these objects will not be limited to a few dozens, the > LSDB *will* grow … > > I think a viable option for 2012 is that if the LLN networks with their > smart objects have to connect to the traditional HOMENET fixed and wireless > networks, they will need to do so through a border router supporting both > environments. IMHO, we don't need one protocol that meets all requirements > for every possible device in the home. > > Thanks, > Acee > > > > > > >> > >> My first choice would NOT be something that isn't proven in the field in > multiple interoperable implementations. > >> > >> As a person thinking about making a recommendation, I'd suggest that > folks read https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-4.1.2 and ask > themselves why that level of interoperability isn't mandatory. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> homenet mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > > > > _______________________________________________ > > homenet mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > -- Robert Cragie Gridmerge Ltd. 89 Greenfield Crescent, Wakefield, WF4 4WA, UK +44 1924 910888 +1 415 513 0064 http://www.gridmerge.com
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
