Re: [manet] [homenet] Question for you

Hi all,

This is an valuable and necessary initiative.

As I follow the ROLL WG, may I point you to some doc that have been produced by this WG, and may address some of your questions :

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-roll-protocols-survey-07 : This draft provide a good survey of several routing protocols (OSPF/IS-IS, OLSRv2, TBRPF, RIP, AODV, DYMO, DSR) and evaluate each candidate regarding metrics that are relevant for Low-power and Lossy Networks (LLNs).
I think LLNs are applicable to Homenet networks.

RFC 5826 : http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5826 ("Home Automation Routing Requirements in LLNs") : This doc designed by the ROLL WG gather some requirements regarding routing in Home environments. It may provide good input for the Homenet WG.

You may also be interested in the Building version of these requirements, in RFC5867 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5867.

I'm not an expert in Home's Networks, and they may have some different requirements than LLNs that ROLL is looking at.
Please educate me on that point.
But I think we should consider the work that have been done for such constrained devices.

Best regards,

Cédric.

Le 26 sept. 2011 à 21:14, Fred Baker a écrit :

I'm trying to do a somewhat complete requirements and pro/con analysis for IPv6 routing in a small network, the obvious examples being residential and SOHO networks. What I have in pixels at this instant is:

   <section title="Contestant protocols">
       <t></t>
     <section title="Routing Information Protocol">
       <t></t>
     </section>
     <section title="Open Shortest Path First Routing Protocol">
       <t></t>
     </section>
     <section title="IS-IS Routing Protocol">
       <t></t>
     </section>
     <section title="Border Gateway Protocol">
       <t></t>
     </section>
     <section title="Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks">
       <t></t>
     </section>
     <section title="Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing">
       <t>
Can you say "DYMO"?
       </t>
     </section>
     <section title="Optimized Link State Routing Protocol">
       <t></t>
     </section>
   </section>

For some of these, the obvious comment is "YMBK". Some will feel that their selection is the obvious given and will be able to go on at some length as to why, and may be surprised to find that people disagree with them.

I'd like to do several things:
(a) make the list as reasonably complete as possible consistent with openly documented protocols,
(b) provide a reasonably complete and objective analysis of each as I can,
(c) identify the key reasons one would choose each - if there is a reason at all, and
(d) identify the key reasons one would not.

What I don't want to accomplish is deep-six these lists and half a dozen others in arguments.

Do me a favor. Let's do this in private mail. If you think of a protocol I should mention that I haven't, let me know. If you think there is a really good argument for or against any of them in particular, let me know. If you think I'm nuts - I already know that, you don't need to remind me :-)
_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
homenet@ietf.org<mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet