Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec

[Ralph Droms <[e-mail]>]

On Jun 8, 2012, at 7:27 AM 6/8/12, Mukul Goyal wrote:

>>>> Is the receiving node supposed to infer that the selected metric for a RPL Instance using MRHOF is the one metric container included in the DIO (or, in the case of ETX, there is no metric container)?
>>> 
>>> In my opinion, yes.
> 
>> Where is that behavior explicitly described in the relevant specifications?
> 
> It is not. It should be.

OK, having *some* way for a node to determine the selected metric for MRHOF in an advertised RPL Instance tells me how MRHOF can provide the necessary information for the policy decision in section 18.6 of RFC 6550.

I would encourage some more discussion about metric-encoded OCPs.  Seems to me the metric is of at least as much importance (more important, in my opinion) in choosing a RPL Instance as the way in which the DODAG is constructed based on that metric (i.e., the computation part of the OF).  If I were trying to get a packet from a node to the LBR, I'd be much more interested in the ETX or the latency than whether the path is computed with hysteresis.

- Ralph

> 
> Mukul
>