[Roll] Question about non-storing mode in RPL

Hamidreza Kermajani <h.kermajani9@gmail.com> Fri, 29 October 2010 14:48 UTC

Return-Path: <h.kermajani9@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DBF13A689D for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:48:20 -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=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Bme4s3jMbsiC for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:48:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gy0-f172.google.com (mail-gy0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D967B3A6A51 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by gya6 with SMTP id 6so2161151gya.31 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:50:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=yXVW0URKld11rWnNISg4FCgbTfINDOPZ9DfnStpeR+Q=; b=rQ1AJpVaelxi3glcMsPXsjleJghvQy72usKL1tAAB1OzvuOKkOzgq57g2BS7/gRwMr edFlZZGEV2yjmwbaqsEJmDZb58iHV/NCLMohqht8Evha0Wu5+RvACNazg9lxizguGelV tkrr1td9/6e+71vFnG/Hv+ZlTn9NEv2u4whNc=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=CDqvm4iX/IihNx7gCg9MKToM4udZHVCreT3BPZRhOK1wHoCpomALbP76uPUIJRoRE7 zCJK7WfQ50rBaS8zKeAzLjPtKwesUeaAh1aHtccJL2o2LujulaME3Dd5MvKd2D6TbLRa Q+nBClVHi+6AgtwYvw4JZMc3/Nbasmh2REjjI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.42.170.197 with SMTP id g5mr9853077icz.347.1288363808400; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:50:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.200.203 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:50:05 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 16:50:05 +0200
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=7KdkbSq_9oG6dpXRo8fmVyi_6NxsctOxcsa3t@mail.gmail.com>
From: Hamidreza Kermajani <h.kermajani9@gmail.com>
To: roll@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="90e6ba6e8964243f790493c29345"
Subject: [Roll] Question about non-storing mode in RPL
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 14:48:20 -0000

Hi all,

According to RPL (v.14) that says :
"
9.5. Triggering DAO Messages
Nodes can trigger their sub-DODAG to send DAO messages. Each node
maintains a DAO Trigger Sequence Number (DTSN), which it communicates
through DIO messages.
1. If a node hears one of its DAO parents increment its DTSN, the
node MUST schedule a DAO message transmission using rules in
Section 9.3 and Section 9.4.
2. In non-storing mode, if a node hears one of its DAO parents
increment its DTSN, the node MUST increment its own DTSN.
"

1 - Is the first rule for both mode of operation? or only for storing mode?


As far as I understand, when a node adds a new parent to its DAO parent set
it must to send a DAO message to root, to inform the root about this case,
that's why in each time the root node has a route to other DODAG nodes.

Now my question is :

2 - When a non-storing node must send its DAO message to the DODAG root,
while sending packet to root ,Why should it send the packets to root via its
preferred parent( first to its preferred parent), not directly to the root ?
What's the reason?



Best Regards,
Hamidreza.