Re: [Manet-dt] [Fwd: Re: DYMO SeqNum Decisions]

Hello again Ian,

A few follow-on comments...

ext Ian Chakeres wrote:
>> > Pedro & Fran ran into seq num problems last year. During IETF 65 Ramon
>> > identified another sequence number issue related to this discussion.
>> > Both had problems with RREP being blackholed.
>> Were those problems caused by the scenario outlined in recent e-mails?
>
> Both these problems were because the RREP originator was not
> incrementing its sequence number.
That formulation prejudices the outcome.  I will interpret it to mean that,
both problems would be solved if the RREP originator would
increment its sequence number.  But the problem is _caused_ by
some other occurence.  It is this true cause of the problem that
I want to know more about.

>> > If we force intermediate nodes to examine information about the target
>> > (last known seqnum and hopcnt) we might be able to know something at
>> > the target node about the route traversed. But we still need to ensure
>> > that a RREQ will reach the target, and I think any such logic could
>> > result in RREQ blackholing.
>> I think I am missing something here, unfortunately.  Can you say
>> just a little more about when the blackholing would occur?
>
> This condition would occur whenever an intermediate node discarded a
> RREQ (due to new rules) and it was the only route to the target.
Do you mean the new DYMO rules?  Or, which ones specifically?

-- 
Please address return e-mail to charles.perkins@nokia.com

_______________________________________________
Manet-dt mailing list
Manet-dt@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt