Re: [Roll] trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local

[Robert Cragie <[e-mail]>]

Can you provide a practical example of how you would configure IPv6 
addresses for a simple RPL network comprised of, say, a DODAG root and 
two RPL routers at a rank above? And generally how route-over networks 
would work where interfaces are assigned solely a /128 prefix? 
Forbidding the use of a subnet prefix on the basis that link 
connectivity cannot be guaranteed seems rather odd to me.

Robert

On 24/07/2013 16:32, Ulrich Herberg wrote:
> I have pointed out two documents in my earlier email that explain in
> long detail why I believe that multi-hop subnets are a really bad
> idea. The AUTOCONF RFC 5889 presents an architecture for avoiding all
> these problems by using /128 prefixes. In that regards, a subnet wide
> flooding would be fairly uninteresting, as it would not go beyond a
> single router.
>
> Regards
> Ulrich
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Michael Richardson
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> I would still like an explanation of why "subnet" is the wrong term.
>>
>> When would scope-3 would be used such that it would not correspond to the set
>> of links on which a "/64" (or other size) is used?
>>
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>