IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Manet-dt] IANA Port & Multicast Addresses

"Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> Thu, 29 June 2006 21:01 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw3dw-0002fW-Qt; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:01:44 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw3dv-0002fQ-Vx for manet-dt@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:01:43 -0400
Received: from stl-smtpout-01.boeing.com ([130.76.96.56] helo=stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw3du-0003za-Mj for manet-dt@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:01:43 -0400
Received: from blv-av-01.boeing.com (blv-av-01.boeing.com [192.42.227.216]) by stl-smtpout-01.ns.cs.boeing.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/TEST_SMTPIN) with ESMTP id k5TL1K9w000522; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:01:21 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by blv-av-01.boeing.com (8.11.3/8.11.3/MBS-AV-LDAP-01) with ESMTP id k5TL1Kw03278; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com ([130.247.54.35]) by XCH-NWBH-11.nw.nos.boeing.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:01:16 -0700
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: [Manet-dt] IANA Port & Multicast Addresses
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 14:01:15 -0700
Message-ID: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1017740D6@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
In-Reply-To: <44A4181F.4050702@dif.um.es>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Manet-dt] IANA Port & Multicast Addresses
Thread-Index: Acabp6s766+OfjmJQLOGVYE3ZvQhWgAFAb8Q
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: "Pedro M. Ruiz" <pedrom@dif.um.es>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jun 2006 21:01:16.0346 (UTC) FILETIME=[297881A0:01C69BBF]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d185fa790257f526fedfd5d01ed9c976
Cc: manet-dt@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: manet-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: MANET Design Team <manet-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt>, <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/manet-dt>
List-Post: <mailto:manet-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt>, <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: manet-dt-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Pedro,

> I think that situation might be interesting for some very
> resource-limited devices. What I do not fully understand is why
> we need the "All MANET Nodes" if we can use for that case the
> "All hosts" (224.0.0.1) address.

Since it is link-scoped, "All hosts" is useful only for reaching
first-hop neighbors; a site-scoped "All MANET Nodes" multicast
address could be used to reach all nodes within the connected MANET.
Do we need "All MANET Nodes" in addition to "All MANET Routers",
though? If there can be nodes on a MANET link that participate
in neighbor discovery but not in the MANET routing protocol then
something like "All MANET Nodes" might be useful.

Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com

________________________________

From: Pedro M. Ruiz [mailto:pedrom@dif.um.es] 
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 11:13 AM
To: Templin, Fred L
Cc: Dearlove, Christopher (UK); Ian Chakeres; manet-dt@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Manet-dt] IANA Port & Multicast Addresses


Templin, Fred L wrote: 

	Chris,
	
	  

		First I don't understand the distinction between
		all MANET routers and all MANET nodes. The model
		I have (which I think is shared by RFC 2501) is
		that a node contains a router and may contain hosts.
		So "all MANET nodes" means "all MANET routers" plus
		maybe also delivering to all hosts in the MANET, but
		that's not clear to me.
		    

	
	We have been discussing this internally too. I think the
	question is, is it possible to have a node on a MANET
	link that is a neighbor of a MANET router but does not
	participate in the MANET routing protocol itself? If so,
	then it might make sense to have an "All MANET Nodes"
	multicast address that is different from "All MANET
	Routers". (And if not, why not?)
	  

I think that situation might be interesting for some very
resource-limited devices. What I do not fully understand is why we need
the "All MANET Nodes" if we can use for that case the "All hosts"
(224.0.0.1) address.

Regards, Pedro


	Fred
	fred.l.templin@boeing.com 
	
	_______________________________________________
	Manet-dt mailing list
	Manet-dt@ietf.org
	https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
	
	  



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro M. Ruiz, Ph.D.                    E-mail: pedrom@dif.um.es
Fac. Informatica, Univ. of Murcia       Phone:  +34968364335
Campus de Espinardo s/n                 Fax:    +34968364151
E-30100, Espinardo, Murcia              www: ants.dif.um.es/~pedrom/
SPAIN
---------------------------------------------------------------------


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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email