Hi Emmanuel, From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Emmanuel Baccelli Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 1:54 PM To: Templin, Fred L; Internet Area Cc: Joe Touch; Carsten Bormann Subject: RE: [Int-area] About draft-baccelli-manet-multihop-communication-04
Hi Fred Le 22 janv. 2015 19:36, "Templin, Fred L" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit : > > Hi , > > IP runs over "links" as specified in "IP-over-(foo)" documents. What the > document in question > is describing is a "multi-link" which is not a candidate for "IP-over-(foo)". > Nevertheless, people (MANET, ROLL, AUTOCONF, 6LOWPAN...) have been running IP over interfaces with connectivity as described in this draft. It's difficult and it yields specific protocol design decisions because of the unique characteristics of such connectivity, but it's doable. I know a little bit about MANET and AUTOCONF. My understanding was that standard routing protocols like OLSR and OSPF-MANET are used to connect these kinds of links into multilink subnetworks (note I did NOT say “subnet”) and that IP can be run by configuring an NBMA tunnel that sees the subnetwork as a fully connected link. IP then runs in the normal fashion over the NBMA tunnel. You can write an “IP-over-(foo)” document about a tunnel of that nature. But, this document cannot present itself as an “IP-over-(foo)” document. Thanks - Fred More people (6LO, CORE, LWIG...) want to design more protocols running over such networks. There is a risk that protocol design decisions that are made do not capitalize on available knowledge about the characteristics of such networks. Actually, the fact that we are having this argument right now shows that: - there is no such document available yet (except this draft) - there is a need for such a document Best, Emmanuel > Thanks - Fred >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
