IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com> Wed, 11 November 2009 02:30 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 BBC7A28C1D5 for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:30:05 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.09
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.09 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.509, 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 xEG1xFfgxwNI for <ipv6@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:30:05 -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 C464B28C273 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:30:04 -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: ApoEADqw+UpAZnwN/2dsb2JhbADFX5hFhDwEgWs
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,720,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="67399567"
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com ([64.102.124.13]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Nov 2009 02:30:32 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com ([72.163.62.190]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAB2UVXO008414; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:30:32 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-114.cisco.com ([72.163.62.156]) by xbh-rcd-102.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:30:31 -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: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:30:29 -0600
Message-ID: <AF742F21C1FCEE4DAB7F4842ABDC511C1C2E2F@XMB-RCD-114.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4AFA20A3.1000804@ericsson.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk: draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07
Thread-Index: AcpidpuWx5PBTY4KRXCDAXjJRBhHMAAABrmw
References: <AF742F21C1FCEE4DAB7F4842ABDC511C1C2927@XMB-RCD-114.cisco.com> <4AFA20A3.1000804@ericsson.com>
From: "Hemant Singh (shemant)" <shemant@cisco.com>
To: Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Nov 2009 02:30:31.0767 (UTC) FILETIME=[F0B70670:01CA6276]
Cc: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, ipv6@ietf.org, Erik Nordmark <erik.nordmark@sun.com>, Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>, samitac@ipinfusion.com, cabo@tzi.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: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:30:05 -0000

Suresh, 

I have already given an explanation.  There is no means in IPv6 ND to
signal a prefix as off-link! It's just that when the L-bit is cleared
the host has to send traffic to the default router.

Hemant

-----Original Message-----
From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:26 AM
To: Hemant Singh (shemant)
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org; Pascal Thubert (pthubert); jhui@archrock.com;
samitac@ipinfusion.com; cabo@tzi.org; Erik Nordmark; Dave Thaler
Subject: Re: off-link model in the 6lowpan talk:
draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-07

Hi Hemant,

On 09-11-09 08:16 PM, Hemant Singh (shemant) wrote:
> Humble apologies for not reading this lowpan doc, but I have listened
to 
> its core ideas during the past IETFs prezos and understand the link 
> model being used for it.   I still have some general comments that are

> worth discussing when bringing such work to 6man.
> 
>  
> 
> 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).   

This is not accurate. This can also be signaled using an RA including a 
PIO by setting L=0 in the PIO.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email