IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [core] 🔔 WGLC for Resource Directory

Peter van der Stok <stokcons@bbhmail.nl> Wed, 29 May 2019 07:49 UTC

Return-Path: <stokcons@bbhmail.nl>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1C212016C for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2019 00:49:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=bbhmail.nl
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BXpihy4TiJc3 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 May 2019 00:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtprelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0007.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34B2012015D for <core@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 May 2019 00:49:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (clb03-v110.bra.tucows.net [216.40.38.60]) by smtprelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17B858368EED; Wed, 29 May 2019 07:49:29 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bbhmail.nl; h= mime-version:content-type:date:from:to:cc:subject:reply-to :in-reply-to:references:message-id; s=key; bh=ZPp1MhPKLBt1y7YpCD /2n0UfrHNlu/hkP4hYx50YJ5I=; b=Hkzy5yQ7SN/aFZ4IVJyWGKmm+XQxV6HyH8 1K632BidWItXRUGlovcomSSfhj12lRM83WEu9QynafTJI5it+swziDY8nobW/UUG n86Ex9RjipJn3j6/jEENgask4P/TmPFrVYfjFCD00cQJ2M/FMnO2hsPXulnhtoXo qE8JZ7aRk=
X-Session-Marker: 73746F6B636F6E73406262686D61696C2E6E6C
X-Spam-Summary: 10, 1, 0, , d41d8cd98f00b204, stokcons@bbhmail.nl, :::::::, RULES_HIT:41:46:72:150:152:355:379:582:800:960:962:967:973:983:988:989:1152:1189:1208:1221:1260:1313:1314:1345:1359:1431:1436:1437:1516:1517:1518:1535:1542:1575:1588:1589:1592:1594:1711:1730:1776:1792:2198:2199:2527:2528:2553:2557:2559:2562:2731:2902:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3586:3622:3769:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3874:4250:4321:4891:5007:6117:6119:6261:6298:6657:6678:7464:7875:7903:7904:8603:9036:9177:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:11984:12043:12050:12114:12295:12555:12740:12895:12986:13071:13139:13161:13229:13255:13439:14093:14096:14180:14181:14721:21060:21063:21080:21324:21433:21451:21625:21740:21810:30003:30006:30030:30041:30054:30070:30090, 0, RBL:216.40.42.5:@bbhmail.nl:.lbl8.mailshell.net-62.8.55.100 66.201.201.201, CacheIP:none, Bayesian:0.5, 0.5, 0.5, Netcheck:none, DomainCache:0, MSF:not bulk, SPF:fn, MSBL:0, DNSBL:neutral, Custom_rules:0:0:0, LFtime:24, LUA_SUMMARY:none
X-HE-Tag: club41_188ac7a58a415
X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5766
Received: from mail.bbhmail.nl (imap-ext [216.40.42.5]) (Authenticated sender: webmail@stokcons@bbhmail.nl) by omf14.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 29 May 2019 07:49:28 +0000 (UTC)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_8496bfe58f590551e8aabb2d9afe0c68"
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 09:49:28 +0200
From: Peter van der Stok <stokcons@bbhmail.nl>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Cc: consultancy@vanderstok.org, core@ietf.org, Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <137192BD-7638-4D2E-A6E5-E1618499366F@fugue.com>
References: <AM5PR0701MB230754CF5CD643B6B7DC1A7697420@AM5PR0701MB2307.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <EBFF17D7-86DF-4C3E-B69E-EF69206A6D17@fugue.com> <02585a832a91742de93f6d311259ae61@bbhmail.nl> <CF34C053-A417-4914-BB28-B4E47E97A625@fugue.com> <498bff27c1804f08365f0e11e6d24050@bbhmail.nl> <32B6BB77-91AA-4F85-B5EA-6AC8C6407F7F@fugue.com> <a97554a90cfd49ce21fb59e43ff0ed63@bbhmail.nl> <33B4FD70-E650-47E4-A603-BD4928E4C47F@fugue.com> <f7fe549e40f879c6f46a0a7d8242241a@bbhmail.nl> <137192BD-7638-4D2E-A6E5-E1618499366F@fugue.com>
Message-ID: <0d20366a188573397f9e98e4f8adc8e2@bbhmail.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@bbhmail.nl
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.7
X-Originating-IP: [86.203.245.197]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/6DVzW0uNjBuUue4gFnbgQTVKCd0>
Subject: Re: [core] 🔔 WGLC for Resource Directory
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 07:49:42 -0000

HI Ted,

RFC 6775 explicitly discourages multicast over the mesh network.
Neighbour discovery is done with link-local broadcast, replaced with
unicast whenever possible.
In the mesk all 6LR know the addresses of their neighbouring 6LR.
The 6LBR only needs to know the addresses of the neigbouring 6LR,
obtained with with one broadcast and n unicasts.

Sending a multicast form each node to learn the address of the RD
generates many more messages in a multihop mesh.

Does this answer the question below?

Greetings,

Peter
Ted Lemon schreef op 2019-05-28 19:43:

> On May 27, 2019, at 12:31 AM, Peter van der Stok <stokcons@bbhmail.nl> wrote: 
> 
>> For example, in those cases a border router is present once a month for a few hours to read out data.
>> No RDA0 option,  avoid multicast, no host names. Therefore, the configured RD IP address seems reasonable.
> 
> Isn't it the case generally that in order for the device to know that there is a BR present, the BR has to do some kind of multicast?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email