Re: [Roll] WG call to adopt draft-brandt-roll-rpl-applicability-home-building-03

    >> Based upon recent clarifications to P2P-RPL, it seems that it is
    >> not possible to use P2P-RPL without prior using rooted RPL,

    Ralph> How so?

[MCR]

1) we said that LL addressees are not permitted in the P2P's DRO.
2) we said that P2P can not have a PIO, so the P2P process can not 
   number the nodes.

Therefore, in order to use P2P RPL, there must first have been an RPL
that provided stable addresses to all nodes.  (I wrote "rooted",
intending to mean grounded, but probably that's too much)

[MG]

But, P2P-RPL allows elision of the prefix. So, why can't a router (in a home LLN) participate in P2P-RPL using just link identifier as the address? Why does it need to know the prefix if it is understood that there is only one prefix and that prefix can be elided?

Mukul

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [ 
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [ 
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [ 

_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll