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

["Emmanuel Baccelli" <[e-mail]>]

OK ;) As far as I'm concerned, I think we should update the text; Should be
in -01.Emmanuel


On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Teco Boot <[e-mail]> wrote:

>    > - We may say that router B is a neighbor of router A. In this
> >   terminology, there is no guarantee that router A is a neighbor of
> >   router B.
>
> In this case, the neighbor table of router B would list router A.
> So I say router A is neighbor of router B, and there is no guarantee
> that router B is a neighbor of router A.
> Or I say the relation between neighbors is symmetric, but some neighbors
> may not be aware of this.
>
>
>
>
>
> OK, I think I see what you mean: you are saying that since B hears A, the
> text should rather be:
>
> "A is neighbor of router B, and there is no guarantee that router B is a
> neighbor of router A"
>
> Am I correct?
>
>
>
> Yes, but others could prefer the original text.
>
> If so, I am interested in the protocol that implement such.
>
> If there is no such implementation, please update the text.
>
>
>
> Teco.
>

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