Re: [Roll] [roll] #105: trickle-mcast: how to determine scope of MPL domain

["Dijk, Esko" <[e-mail]>]

> but, it's not at all clear to me that this is a real use case!
> Is the PAN-ID relevant?  is there one 6LBR or 6 of them?

As Peter remarked earlier, the case with one 6LBR is more realistic than the case with 6 6LBRs for cost reasons. For the case of a single 6LoWPAN (one 6LBR), the PAN-ID discussion is not relevant as there's just one big LoWPAN.

Esko

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
Sent: Monday 19 November 2012 16:15
To: Dijk, Esko
Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #105: trickle-mcast: how to determine scope of MPL domain

<#part sign=pgpmime>

>>>>> "Dijk" == Dijk, Esko <[e-mail]> writes:
    >> Yes, this is my belief as well.  so I still do not think that we
    >> have a clear use case/description of what/how a less-than-subnet
    >> MPL domain would be defined/used.

    Dijk> A clear use case seems to be Peter's office topology where all
    Dijk> nodes are connected as a single LoWPAN with one 6LBR. **Each
    Dijk> office/room can be configured as an MPL domain** The event

but, it's not at all clear to me that this is a real use case!
Is the PAN-ID relevant?  is there one 6LBR or 6 of them?

--
Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/


________________________________
The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.