IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local

Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net> Tue, 15 October 2013 16:35 UTC

Return-Path: <d.sturek@att.net>
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 2AE0811E819E for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:35:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 iFudnu97zRP3 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:35:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm1-vm5.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm1-vm5.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.119]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E0A521E81B0 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:35:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [216.39.60.165] by nm1.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Oct 2013 16:34:02 -0000
Received: from [67.195.22.118] by tm1.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Oct 2013 16:34:02 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp113.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Oct 2013 16:34:02 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1381854842; bh=7OyvWHCmJdNDicTnJgKzeHczy6Ta2gyz535wKkzQ590=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:X-Rocket-Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:CC:Message-ID:Thread-Topic:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding; b=WAKoplw3yhybgXkXyfCQ517f9aDF9fCtjWf5Sf8ayPhsE6aEpLXYvfDPE8u730V+hXINSqhcnvGQqXnGuQ2i2+sdN4SWNXory9qYNTUzVijO24t+UdHxT2Mo5cD/mWoiv6IvIjjWF4c9sJwrkOrriK5eacHzMv6TFlqbrmcmIAY=
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 380136.61539.bm@smtp113.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: vLIbOEkVM1nyFbtE8aKYlKhV3JDqYtgNfcZzdlg5YsnK_7r WSdjEmluYSAsB13wPHOnYg_K5.yrzMZFnCEKu0xNxdm6GBy4TqM1qvwwUuix vo6b.PrZXs58YWENmR9mR.xxHOqz_xNIRNndmFoCCcU2n3FzqEv6jBFWU4wq Q_rYPzGSHd5A7Ux82ZCP0WwIXzZvJptvMnmgJa3wKSVvGnX00b8vFzVI386R lex8I5v3Q6u9v2Om2T0zyD_7dVsrvFqo9iJNp0MsZAlctEGB3Y6zvpQ_BLnB Uhvjge5LyPIN2hIg4Eca5.WT60N1TJXd8NmiAISpjceifLSB0H3Lpd3MB4v6 YDt.140Zcvkd5cMgVVDe.8wX8RLo1iiNbT9WRYISAV8zRJ6PHxrEeaQpvpDM _xQwWteWj1Ew8LXYeySYfTj_wHS4tlYRVlZK2EqpNB0ZeBER34i.Cu7QGOGx VfMj.CxSurkv3lr8xDdh29kwb2TEzlM.uW7pjMMhx0d_.BIMUf64AdnPNKwn BG5JBMgxgRWI8sPZ9EWVxxVZU1yuyFUwjcgDwR5aXBd.6Lx2zDRwbkCO6
X-Yahoo-SMTP: fvjol_aswBAraSJvMLe2r1XTzhBhbFxY8q8c3jo-
X-Rocket-Received: from [10.1.1.129] (d.sturek@66.27.60.174 with ) by smtp113.sbc.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Oct 2013 09:34:02 -0700 PDT
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.8.130913
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 09:33:59 -0700
From: Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <CE82BA46.24343%d.sturek@att.net>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local
In-Reply-To: <3599.1381852752@sandelman.ca>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: mariainesrobles@gmail.com, johui@cisco.com, rdroms@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 16:35:44 -0000

Hi Michael,

We should leave in scope 4 for use in administratively scoped domains.
This would allow applications to define specific multicast addresses using
scope 4 without having to go through the trouble to "un-reserve"
adminstrative scope.

Also, I am in favor of Ralph's proposal on using PAN ID for MPL scope 3.
I don't see how any automatic configuration could take place if we can't
identify a concrete identifier for the scope.  The other alternative (and
to be honest the one I thought we were going to use) is DODAG ID.   This
would allow your scenario where a subnet of different link technologies
could support MPL domain 3.

Don


On 10/15/13 8:59 AM, "Michael Richardson" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:

>
>
>Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net> wrote:
>    > At some point, I think it would be interesting to see multicast
>    > forwarding rules in a mesh network where flooding is not used.  I
>would
>    > see that case as the example of where scope 4 would be used.
>
>okay, so when we write a new protocol, we can specify this.
>Why have the code there to support scope-4 when there is no other
>behaviour?
>
>    > I know that a lot of work is needed in defining the rules for
>    > forwarding when flooding is not used but in a large mesh network,
>there
>    > would be a lot of benefit to such a feature.
>
>Do you agree with me about PANID vs Subnet or not?
>
>--
>Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Roll mailing list
>Roll@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email