IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

mase <mase@ie.niigata-u.ac.jp> Thu, 29 June 2006 22:34 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw55R-0003Gz-Kk; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:34:13 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw55Q-0003GF-V3 for manet-dt@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:34:12 -0400
Received: from stsc1260-eth-s1-s1p1-vip.va.neustar.com ([156.154.16.129] helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw4ay-0000mX-Ue for manet-dt@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 18:02:44 -0400
Received: from mailgate.cc.niigata-u.ac.jp ([133.35.14.100]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fw4Id-0000Vz-CA for manet-dt@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:43:49 -0400
Received: from mailgate.cc.niigata-u.ac.jp (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.cc.niigata-u.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 074772A0115 for <manet-dt@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 06:43:41 +0900 (JST)
Received: from chamame.ie.niigata-u.ac.jp (chamame.ie.niigata-u.ac.jp [133.35.169.34]) by mailgate.cc.niigata-u.ac.jp (Postfix) with SMTP id E4A942A0093 for <manet-dt@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Jun 2006 06:43:40 +0900 (JST)
Received: (qmail 8340 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2006 06:43:35 +0900
Received: from unknown (HELO MS191.ie.niigata-u.ac.jp) (133.35.156.191) by chamame.ie.niigata-u.ac.jp with SMTP; 30 Jun 2006 06:43:35 +0900
Message-Id: <5.0.2.5.2.20060630061857.06e3fb30@127.0.0.1>
X-Sender: mh.ie.niigata-u.ac.jp:mase:apop@127.0.0.1
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2-J
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 06:38:58 +0900
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>, "Pedro M. Ruiz" <pedrom@dif.um.es>
From: mase <mase@ie.niigata-u.ac.jp>
Subject: RE: [Manet-dt] IANA Port & Multicast Addresses
In-Reply-To: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A1017740D6@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos .boeing.com>
References: <44A4181F.4050702@dif.um.es>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--)
X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906
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, Fred and all,

At 14:01 06/06/29 -0700, Templin, Fred L wrote:
>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.

In the autoconf framework draft (draft-mase-autoconf-framework-02), a node 
may be in the advertising state, where pre-service MANET-DAD can be 
performed. Such a node doesn't participate in routing message and data 
forwarding, but need to process routing control messages in order to 
perform DAD and DAA (Dupkicate Address Advertisement). In this context, I 
think that all MANET nodes may be useful.

Kenichi





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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email