I got tired of waiting for someone else to drive consensus on a routing solution, so I wrote a draft. It would have been better to have a draft for each proposal, describing how it meets the requirements. I list the contenders that I can recall (zOSPF, RIPng, UP-PIO, IS-IS, MANEMO, RPL), and evaluate each based on the routing requirements I sent a couple of months ago.[1]
You may disagree with my evaluation of a given solution for a given requirement. Great, say so, and we'll figure out if the requirement was poorly written (in fact, a lot of them are non-requirements and should be removed), or if I misunderstand the protocol, or if I was unfair to some idea, or if there's a better word than "somewhat." In particular, I have no knowledge of MANEMO or RPL, so I can't evaluate them. MANEMO probably shouldn't be here, since there isn't even a draft to point to. If you don't see your favorite protocol on this list, you need to submit a draft explaining how it solves all these problems. I hope folks find this useful.[2] Lee [1]The current version of homenet-arch doesn't include those, so I posted it as a standalone draft, draft-howard-homenet-routing-requirements [2] If it needs a serious rev, I'll clean up the References section, and maybe rewrite the requirements draft to move non-requirements to a separate section. But if it helps the WG progress and doesn't need to be published, that's good, too. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 5:21 PM > To: Howard, Lee > Cc: Howard, Lee > Subject: New Version Notification for > draft-howard-homenet-routing-comparison-00.txt > > A new version of I-D, draft-howard-homenet-routing-comparison-00.txt has been > successfully submitted by Lee Howard and posted to the IETF repository. > > Filename: draft-howard-homenet-routing-comparison > Revision: 00 > Title: Evaluation of Proposed Homenet Routing Solutions > Creation date: 2011-12-29 > WG ID: Individual Submission > Number of pages: 14 > > Abstract: > This document evaluates the various proposals for routing in an > unmanaged home network. > > > > > The IETF Secretariat This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout. _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
