Re: [Autoconf] aspects of multi-hop wireless communication

["Charles E. Perkins" <[e-mail]>]

Hello Alex,

Alexandru Petrescu wrote:
>
> Well I'm not looking at brute force solutions, but solutions to simpler
> problems.  The advertising you mention - could work without taking into
> considerations the asymmetricity/nontransitivity, if we think it's 
> about Router Advertisements.

This is the crux of the discussion, and what I claim you have
to decide about.  Either you want to restrict the effort to
only links which are unaffected by asymmetry/nontransitivity,
or not.  If you want to make the restriction, and yet the
group is chartered to create solutions for networks that
do not adhere to the restrictions, then I think it means that
you need to charter another group or build support for
rechartering [autoconf].
>
>> But, on the other hand, if a solution that works for 802.{11*,16,...}
>>  is created in a way that is cognizant of the wireless 
>> characteristics as we have described in our Internet Draft, then it 
>> is _more likely_ to work for the other unspecified but presumably 
>> similar media.
>>
>> Which is why we wrote it.
>>
>> Do you disagree with this motivation?
>
> No, I don't disagree with that motivation - supposedly if it works for 
> non-transitive links it will work for transitive links too.  I just 
> look at it as something which may be too much for simpler needs.

This is the same point, reformulated.  You would like to deal
only with simpler networks, and seem to claim that is sufficient.
Perhaps at the cost of truckloads of repeaters for disaster
situations?


Regards,
Charlie P.

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf