Re: [Autoconf] Conclusion: draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model-02.txt

[Alexandru Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

ThomasC, oh sorry, so the problem statement document is going to happen 
later?  We're not yet at that stage?

And in this "IP Addressing Model in Ad Hoc Networks" we don't even 
mention multicast addresses, as if the multicast address were not an 
address?

Sorry for disturbing but my remark was really gentle, I thought the 
draft could easily mention multicast address.

I sometimes feel that the more I ask a thing the less it gets accepted. 
  IT must be because it comes from me :-)

I will shut up maybe things will happen better :-)

Alex

Le 16/02/2010 21:35, Thomas Heide Clausen a écrit :
> Dear Alex,
>
> On Feb 16, 2010, at 21:29 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>
>> Le 16/02/2010 21:23, Thomas Heide Clausen a écrit :
>>> Dear Alex,
>>>
>>> Autoconf is about configuring addresses on interfaces, not on
>>> allocating addresses in a registry, not sending IP packets to
>>> multicast destinations.
>>
>> Thomas, thank you for the reply.
>>
>> Link-layer multicast mechanisms are used in any autoconfing (DHCPv6,
>> SLAAC, probably more) mechanism.
>>
>> A stack booting up sends packets to multicast destinations.
>>
>> MANET already allocates a multicast address for this.
>>
>> Suffices it to mention it.
>>
>
> These reflections belong properly in the problem-statement/scoping and
> solution-space discussions -- hopefully, we will be able to get to those
> (the fun part: building protocols) soon. So hold that thought until later.
>
>> Otherwise leave place for non-understanding: will the IPv6 autoconf
>> stack use the MANET multicast address? Or the other non-MANET multicast
>> address?
>
> If I configure my addresses manually, as is one viable option, I can
> follow the recommendations in
> draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model-02.txt and have a valid
> configuration. In that case, the "configuration mechanism" needs no
> multicast. I note that this may apply more to IPv4 than IPv6, and that
> the document covers both.
>
> If a MANET autoconfiguration protocol needs to exchange information for
> proper functioning - which it may well do - then that protocol will have
> to decide on which addresses, messages and algorithms to use for that.
> So again, these reflections belong properly in the
> problem-statement/scoping and solution-space discussions.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Thomas
>
>> I mostly agree with you.
>>
>> And there are two different people here (Teco, myself) saying
>> approximately the same thing about multicast. The autoconf group is not
>> large. Are two opinions worth ignoring?
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>>
>>> Thomas
>>>
>>>
>>> On Feb 16, 2010, at 21:20 PM, Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 16/02/2010 21:01, Jari Arkko a écrit :
>>>>> Great. Lets move this doc forward!
>>>>
>>>> YEs, let's move this forward and add multicast discussion to it
>>>> without which autoconf can't fly. Multicast is what typical
>>>> autoconfiguration protocols use today without which they'd never
>>>> work.
>>>>
>>>> Multicast is what IPv6 got builtin precisely for the reason of
>>>> autoconfing.
>>>>
>>>> This draft being silent about multicast spells it's not autoconf,
>>>> IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Jari
>>>>>
>>>>> Ryuji Wakikawa kirjoitti:
>>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have concluded the WGLC of
>>>>>> draft-ietf-autoconf-adhoc-addr-model-01.txt on Dec/23/09, and
>>>>>> have a -02 document issued, following up on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks to all for all the reviews and comments to this
>>>>>> document!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After Thomas and I (Chairs) carefully reviewed discussions on
>>>>>> the mailing list, we do find that there is rough consensus for
>>>>>> the current document.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There was an individual objection to the description of the
>>>>>> use of link-local address, but we did not detect wide support
>>>>>> within the working group. This objection will, of course, be
>>>>>> reflected in the PROTO write-up that will be sent to the IESG
>>>>>> and the ADs, and reflected in the tracker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a conclusion, we have established rough consensus to the
>>>>>> new document.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The WG chairs will start preparing the PROTO writeup for
>>>>>> forwarding the document.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WG chairs
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing
>>>>> list [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing
>>>> list [e-mail]
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Autoconf mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
>
>