[Manet-dt] Re: DYMO SeqNum Decisions

["Ian Chakeres" <[e-mail]>]

I've been thinking about situation when a node must increment its
SeqNum when sending a RREP.

Currently RREQ are not modified in flight (as they are
re-forwarded/broadcast), a feature that I think is a very important -
and a feature must be supported at the minimum.

If a nodes forwards a RREQ that means that the routing information
contained about the originator was sufficient to create/update a route
to the originator. It does not examine or check the information about
the RREQ target.

When the RREQ reaches the target, the target knows the sequence number
that the originator knew when the RREQ was issued. The target also
knows the distance (hopcount) to the originator.

Since it does not know information about the routing tables in
intermediate nodes (particularly the sequence number and hopcnt about
itself), it must increment its sequence number. If it doesn't then
there is the possibility that the RREP will be dropped as it traverses
the network back to the originator.

Does anyone have a way around this issue, or can you suggest something
I'm missing?

Thanks.
Ian

On 8/12/06, Ian Chakeres <[e-mail]> wrote:
> As an exercise in ensuring dymo sequence numbers work properly, I've
> created a few slides discussing important dymo sequence number
> decisions.
>
> Pages 1 & 2 talk about judging routing information usefulness. The
> goal is to not have loops, while not requiring nodes to increment
> their OwnSeqNum unless absolutely necessary. Incrementing OwnSeqNum
> essentially disqualifies existing routing information in the network
> that may not be bad.
>
> Pages 3 & 4 talk about incrementing OwnSeqNum. Since nodes issuing
> RREQ don't know the state of routing tables at intermediate nodes,
> they need to increment their sequence number. Otherwise, receiving
> nodes might discard this information. The target on the other hand has
> more information from the RREQ message (last known values and some
> information about the route traversed). The target can use this
> information to optimize sequence number incrementing.
>
> Intermediate nodes that append their routing information have two
> options, updating their sequence number and ensure it will be fresh at
> other nodes, or not.  If the sequence number is not incremented it
> might not be considered fresh by intermediate nodes. It is not clear
> what the recommended procedure should be. Please make a suggestion. I
> suggest incrementing OwnSeqNum.
>
> Page 5 talks about the cases when an Intermediate node could reply.
> Currently we don't define intermediate node replies, but it is a
> useful concept. One more thing, I've introduced a concept "MaxAge"
> which is the maximum amount of time a piece of routing information can
> be maintained. This is to assist in reboots, by having a hard deadline
> on the maximum amount of time that a node must wait before
> participating.
>
> Please review the flowcharts and let me know if something doesn't make
> sense or is wrong.
>
> Ian Chakeres
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Manet-dt mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt