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

> Chris, is your opinion we should define only one link-local multicast
> address at this time?

I think we should find out what people want and submit
whatever there's a definite need for (not a hypothetical
maybe in the future case). I only can see a need for
all link-local neighbour routers in terms of what the WG
is chartered to do. If someone else has such a need (an
aspect of SMF or DYMO I've overlooked for example) then
bring that on too, but if not, not.

> Regarding 3 = Port
> The document says all interoperable implementations use the MANET
> port. If you chose to run OLSRv2 on another port, it wouldn't be
> considered interoperable. Otherwise, I don't see an issue with running
> a protocol on another port.

At the moment I don't see any meaning to, for example,
running OLSRv2 and DYMO on the same port, and doing
so introduces distinct complications. Again I'm of
the view of asking for what's needed, no more, no less.
I don't say there isn't a possibility here, but we
should first discuss the architectures and the nasty
questions that arise (I have several, here's one just
for starters - what about multi-message packets, and
who gets the packet header?) and if we have a need,
then ask. Until then, don't.

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************

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