IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Loop Free DODAG Repair Solution

Jianlin Guo <guo@merl.com> Wed, 01 August 2012 17:14 UTC

Return-Path: <guo@merl.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CAA211E821A for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Z7lGlgn9472 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:14:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ns1.merl.com (ns1.merl.com [137.203.5.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EBF11E81F6 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 10:14:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tsumi.merl.com (tsumi.merl.com [137.203.134.9]) by ns1.merl.com (8.13.8/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q71HEFFk011459 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 13:14:16 -0400
Received: from zack.merl.com (zack.merl.com [137.203.134.14]) by tsumi.merl.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q71HEFIc007992 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 13:14:15 -0400
Received: from [137.203.180.64] (hyper64.merl.com [137.203.180.64]) by zack.merl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C3D96F8982 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 13:14:15 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <50196364.2020805@merl.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 13:12:04 -0400
From: Jianlin Guo <guo@merl.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: roll@ietf.org
References: <50194329.3040003@merl.com> <501945CC.5040801@merl.com> <19309.1343840754@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <19309.1343840754@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070200090505010308090005"
Subject: Re: [Roll] Loop Free DODAG Repair Solution
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:14:18 -0000

Hi Michael,

You are right on P2MP situation. We will address it in next version.

Jianlin Guo
On 8/1/2012 1:05 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>>>>> "Jianlin" == Jianlin Guo<guo@merl.com>  writes:
>      Jianlin>  To repair DODAG, a node multicast a repair request (REQ)
>      Jianlin>  message. Upon receiving a REQ message, a neighboring node
>      Jianlin>  generates a repair response (REP) message if it has a
>
> In a P2MP situation, I think that an end-node won't generate any
> traffic, so it won't know that the DODAG is broken.
>
> How can the end-node know that it should effect repair?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status