IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] rplinfo

peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> Fri, 21 July 2017 09:23 UTC

Return-Path: <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
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 DF74C127869 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 02:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.621
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id viZsTZnzbXAF for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 02:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lb1-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net (lb1-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net [194.109.24.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68E8F129A96 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 02:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.xs4all.nl ([IPv6:2001:888:0:22:194:109:20:204]) by smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net with ESMTP id nMP21v00G4CWAV301MP2d8; Fri, 21 Jul 2017 11:23:02 +0200
Received: from 2001:67c:370:128:fd9d:1fa:b33e:78d5 by webmail.xs4all.nl with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Fri, 21 Jul 2017 11:23:02 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2017 11:23:02 +0200
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <32276.1500628738@dooku.sandelman.ca>
References: <b8c959fd621886daf3165d8edb4aa321@xs4all.nl> <CAP+sJUcSg4f_qbnxwCv1dwYUa+MftcZmmhSkOT6jj=wXPPYU0Q@mail.gmail.com> <6b3ea5150f609d2f13a329c39f5aafa6@xs4all.nl> <25395.1500621980@dooku.sandelman.ca> <186acf2e5068c3417520bc21178f31d0@xs4all.nl> <32276.1500628738@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Message-ID: <236fed0b3ea960392c6de0f09effeecb@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@xs4all.nl
User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/dIXQ9DM7ssYHQggqQ_bLbtgyteA>
Subject: Re: [Roll] rplinfo
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 21 Jul 2017 09:23:06 -0000

> So rather than explain that there is a difference, I think we should 
> just
> explain that they are leaves.
> 
The document makes a difference between raf and ~raf.
Explaining they are leaves in the 2 protocols (ND and RPL) is then the 
solution?

Peter

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email