Re: [6lowpan] Fwd: Re: "Advertize on Behalf" flag in ARO

"Reddy, Joseph" <> Tue, 26 April 2011 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6129DE0681 for <>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:50:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H+qTqM2vCpGW for <>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51BCE07CC for <>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:50:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) by (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id p3QFoodu012381 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:50:50 -0500
Received: from (localhost []) by (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id p3QFooin027632 for <>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:50:50 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from (localhost []) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p3QFooep018429 for <>; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:50:50 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:50:30 -0500
From: "Reddy, Joseph" <>
To: "" <>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 10:50:27 -0500
Thread-Topic: [6lowpan] Fwd: Re: "Advertize on Behalf" flag in ARO
Thread-Index: AcwD0PYDKjtLm146QWGGLacaxGgn5AAWH10w
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] Fwd: Re: "Advertize on Behalf" flag in ARO
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:50:57 -0000


I agree we should move forward with this draft without adding additional features. 



Message: 1
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:00:04 -0400
From: Samita Chakrabarti <>
To: Erik Nordmark <>et>, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)"
	<>om>, ""
Cc: 6lowpan <>
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] Fwd: Re:  "Advertize on Behalf" flag in ARO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Pascal and Nicolas,

I am in agreement with the following reasons (by Erik) as to why we don't want to add the TID/sequence# in the ARO message. As discussed many times in the wg that the goal of this 6lowpan-nd work is to provide simple optimized neighbor discovery functionality of the low-power IPv6 network. This is independent of routing protocol functionalities such that it works with multiple routing protocols on top of it.

If RPL  or other routing protocol needs a specific information to pass around, it could do that as an option aka future extension of 6lowpan-nd. We already decided/presented in the Prague wg meeting and the consensus was to  move forward with the 6lowpan-nd as it is plus the editorial changes discussed at the meeting slides.

Besides the dependency of 6lowpan-nd on a specific routing protocol( such as RPL or backbone routing), I have a major concern including a feature like sequence# in the ARO message at this point for supporting a corner case without knowing its larger impact.

As for MIP, I am not sure if we want to run MIPv6 as it is in the 6lowpan network. Our design goal for 6lowpan-nd-basic is to provide the core functionality and then build things on top of it on a modular basis as needed.
Please help in proceeding toward the basic 6lowpan-nd work done first.

Best regards,

| A host isn't aware of whether the routers speak IS-IS or OSPF, so why do the hosts need to be aware of RPL by | passing some TID around?

> I think ND has the same need as MIP for a TID == Sequence # . We know 
> of MIP; We know of RPL. We know of the backbone router operation. We 
> know we'll need the TID and we know exactly why. I think we should 
> have it in the 6LowPAN ND spec right away to avoid interop issues when 
> we add RPL and BR operations.

| I don't see a need in 6lowpan-nd for a TID; the protocol works fine without it.
| I think RPL needs to be improved to deal with reality. Isn't there a desire for RPL to handle 4861 hosts? | | | Those would never know about a TID.

|   Erik

6lowpan mailing list