Re: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MANET Routers
Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> Tue, 18 April 2006 15:03 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1FVrk4-0002TQ-LW; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:03:48 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org)
by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FVrk3-0002RH-Ty
for manet-dt@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:03:47 -0400
Received: from pilot.jhuapl.edu ([128.244.198.200] helo=jhuapl.edu)
by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FVrk2-0003vT-Ei
for manet-dt@ietf.org; Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:03:47 -0400
Received: from ([128.244.206.105])
by pilot.jhuapl.edu with ESMTP id KP-BRARG.21014867;
Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:58:51 -0400
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v623)
In-Reply-To: <374005f30604151505x6fce28d6wdb4f8e7bda58c489@mail.gmail.com>
References: <374005f30604151505x6fce28d6wdb4f8e7bda58c489@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <5829b404176c1f1370143354ea794489@innovationslab.net>
From: Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
Subject: Re: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MANET Routers
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 10:58:51 -0400
To: manet-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.623)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 386e0819b1192672467565a524848168
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>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1996688793=="
Errors-To: manet-dt-bounces@ietf.org
In what context would this common address be used? Do we expect MANETs to exist that run multiple routing protocols? If so, the filtering now has to be done above the MAC filters (i.e. on port or protocol numbers) which will affect power consumption. What about security issues of sending packets that are not meant for a subset of routers, but are received by them due to the shared address? In short, I would like to see a description of how this address will be used before I make any judgment. Regards, Brian On Apr 15, 2006, at 18:05, Ian Chakeres wrote: > Now that we have a common packet building block, and will soon have a > common neighborhood discovery building block, I think it is pretty > natural to use a common multicast address for reaching link-local > MANET routers. Please reply if you support this common multicast > address being allocated. > > If I receive support I will start moving on this. > > Ian Chakeres > > _______________________________________________ > Manet-dt mailing list > Manet-dt@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
_______________________________________________ Manet-dt mailing list Manet-dt@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
- [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MANET R… Ian Chakeres
- RE: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MAN… Joe Macker
- RE: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MAN… Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- Re: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MAN… Brian Haberman
- Re: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MAN… Ian Chakeres
- Re: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MAN… Ian Chakeres
- RE: [Manet-dt] Link local Multicast Address - MAN… Joe Macker