IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 15 October 2013 15:59 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 9D87821E81B9 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 08:59:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.458
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.458 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.141, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id N0JL4emUvcvA for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 08:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3::184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8450A11E813D for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 08:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B9BF2017F; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:09:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id DBA6E63B88; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 11:59:12 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C0C63AEF; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 11:59:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CE829C81.2431C%d.sturek@att.net>
References: <CE829C81.2431C%d.sturek@att.net>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.2; nmh 1.3-dev; GNU Emacs 23.4.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 11:59:12 -0400
Message-ID: <3599.1381852752@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: mariainesrobles@gmail.com, johui@cisco.com, rdroms@cisco.com
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
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: <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: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 15:59:27 -0000

Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net> wrote:
    > At some point, I think it would be interesting to see multicast
    > forwarding rules in a mesh network where flooding is not used.  I would
    > see that case as the example of where scope 4 would be used.

okay, so when we write a new protocol, we can specify this.
Why have the code there to support scope-4 when there is no other behaviour?

    > I know that a lot of work is needed in defining the rules for
    > forwarding when flooding is not used but in a large mesh network, there
    > would be a lot of benefit to such a feature.

Do you agree with me about PANID vs Subnet or not?

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email