IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk: draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07

"Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com> Tue, 10 November 2009 02:05 UTC

Return-Path: <shemant@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E35B33A67AB; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:05:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.563, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jlgW876IJVXs; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:05:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDB893A67A2; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:05:33 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAORY+EqtJV2b/2dsb2JhbADFSZdahD4EgWg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,712,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="67197616"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Nov 2009 02:05:59 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com [72.163.62.200]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAA25xu4022952; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:05:59 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:05:59 -0600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk: draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 20:05:58 -0600
Message-ID: <AF742F21C1FCEE4DAB7F4842ABDC511C1C2947@XMB-RCD-114.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E25A00D1-AD13-482A-91A8-75ACC89200E7@tzi.org>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk: draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07
Thread-Index: AcphpfF5GxdYTsr0S/6unlitMQIdBAAA6YLQ
References: <AF742F21C1FCEE4DAB7F4842ABDC511C1C2927@XMB-RCD-114.cisco.com> <E25A00D1-AD13-482A-91A8-75ACC89200E7@tzi.org>
From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Nov 2009 02:05:59.0261 (UTC) FILETIME=[589EB0D0:01CA61AA]
Cc: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, ipv6@ietf.org, Erik Nordmark <erik.nordmark@sun.com>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, Samita Chakrabarti <samitac@ipinfusion.com>, 6lowpan <6lowpan@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 02:05:35 -0000

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Carsten Bormann [mailto:cabo@tzi.org] 
>Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 10:34 AM
>To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
>Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; 6lowpan; Pascal Thubert (pthubert); Jonathan Hui;
Samita Chakrabarti; Erik Nordmark; Dave Thaler
>Subject: Re: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk:
draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07

>Hemant,

>it is probably best if you copy 6lowpan@ietf.org for discussing this.

Will do - thanks.

>> Note that if the multi-link, multi-hop network has all client nodes  
>> as off-link to each other, then there is only one type of regular ND

>> (RFC4861) RA that can signal off-link.  This is an RA with no PIO  
>> (Prefix Information Option).

>Our RAs typically have a PIO with L bit off and A bit on (actually  
>usually a 6IO with a couple bits of additional information, but since  
>-07 the classic PIO works too).

That is my very point.  ND as specified by RFC 4861 has no means to
signal a prefix as off-link, so the L bit cleared is not signaling
off-link. 

>> Therefore it would be interesting to see the IPv6 ND RA config on  
>> the lowpan edge routers.
>>
>> Anyone has working models of this work to demo to us during any  
>> future IETF?

>I'm sure that can be arranged in Anaheim.

Great.  

Thanks,

Hemant

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email