Re: [manet] draft-ietf-manet-aodvv2-13 review - a couple of big ticket Items

[Justin Dean <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 5:04 PM, Thomas Heide Clausen <
[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> On 22 Mar 2016, at 21:51, Justin Dean <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> I think you're misunderstanding my point. It's my opinion that it's past
> time to come up with some elegant and complex solution to fix this issue.
> Simple and safe solutions should be preferred as we'd likely miss
> something. This is regardless of when the outstanding problem was first
> raised.
>
> My point is that it is an issue that must be addressed: the requirements
> that multiple interfaces can be sharing the same address is old, I have
> raised it multiple times over the years. OLSRv2 was built to support it.
> Henning reported an additional use case.
>
> The WG chair suggesting to disallow it, or to "bridge it", is *not*
> solving the issue raised. It is the WG chair ignoring legitimate
> requirements from the WG, which does not strike me as aligned with proper
> process.
>
> The WG chair saying "it is past time to solve" a long raised (and ignored)
> issue does not strike me as being aligned with proper process either.
>
> Thomas
>
> Since you seem quite passionate about this issue let's work on fixing it
then.  I looked back over NHDP to see how we "solved" this issue (vaguely
remembering something about limiting the address assignment when two
interfaces on a node could reach the same medium but was unable to find
that).  It works because we tag neighboring addresses with either link or
neighbor status based on the incoming interface on which we received hello
messages. It seems to me that if AODVv2 limited RREP messages to the
interface on which the RREQ came in on (multicast or otherwise) that this
would fix the issue.

To do this the Neighbor Table (section 6.3) would have to be updated to
include the local interface on which this neighbor is associated with.
When attempting to check bidirectionality messages would only be sent out
on the listed interface.  This would be similar to the link table in NHDP
and link tlv types.

Justin