IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Which MOP for RPL AODV? (draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl)

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Tue, 19 October 2021 20:03 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
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 039FA3A0A08; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:03:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 MKvC8xNuSZJj; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x331.google.com (mail-wm1-x331.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::331]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 621B43A09FD; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x331.google.com with SMTP id s198-20020a1ca9cf000000b0030d6986ea9fso5256019wme.1; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:03:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qILcem5B6CzT2/bMsuNN+U0eeeK9AMk/jEvpBUQhyxM=; b=poci7P/4VSQWVeSTYCJXc6jeoglNNnJpFQ600cecBF7ygF7kAv+9WQvl3lL0Q6AM2k a0i+k9a70X+i1OQoJ6KugJ68I/7710WEbIW7uR7DiLuEUzskcHuLzcE9oQZTxHXZ3ujP 4o9q5M0tqbjM3FLt/sO/7vFK7poYq5586lyVOsiL+LEOHuBGb6KE/fRLFuTiv4bdNy9R ZY9X3UXGhFYHtQmLrpUrNDpRKYB+zeZ+YdaHYaUX5hQPV1VIE3rJCgNQbE/mCbboAm9h e+OnQU7wGrNb0ZVw6iJdT0ZaCnswsHsOC0M+Csl9EFkDVmThZw6GDVx2PPoAalq7KT36 ymuA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qILcem5B6CzT2/bMsuNN+U0eeeK9AMk/jEvpBUQhyxM=; b=oIxGaUkSvagXVGqxtNo+4MScVJ1HTCyt2PB62xXXxhAOGnXUj4B4XRfWMG9WbK1C5s 8VlMGZ009PkWI+CYRCjJqDw+xw5TlPnDDQuaPVImy602BvzijerNQLK8uB87Eh/tkZ17 dj+jezMwv3nxo8WzyrrVAwCv+5ehZyh9rJqqIIG3Lg/9LH9eM3e6vxOaqLhchyfq8SKL awcJ/1AQv1PwHMk6tfvcM78zEeROCvGklhQt1J2TavHCvnx/nKDKPBScCwydel7erI5E Ej6lnFVMPr4O5ILVzqqvoLXIOXu70Afwb3eHse6STnmOS/bDTJWLLG8xHYptYtCGasxh crqQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530+ZX7ch9QWVn9/33DpyK/2aMl9SmIURgR1JH3tF2sSn9aYuOKP s3MMNQIUJdTS6fc2v9Ja1gcDblPexLKzHZxLwRIcGvdknis=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwfUE2eLXMJw2TRCOrdTx3yNpoKr1yM8/9kB/ixFKXWYVYnQKtvDnyeq3CvCaPLIvfP4Tye47A2JSk4vXj4V6Q=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3b29:: with SMTP id m41mr8388695wms.176.1634673811875; Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:03:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CO1PR11MB48817BF59C64D77794A43F36D8B09@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAMMESsxLxfNdPE+s11DqiwDuXg7auwVc953kgC_EZ28bugEWrA@mail.gmail.com> <CO1PR11MB488152F0F99251ED4B9DB3BFD8B29@CO1PR11MB4881.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAMMESsyeM4Dfy4yQBKitNcfaS7E=2-x8Ly2hLnbmBHcFvg7rrw@mail.gmail.com> <29221.1633883421@localhost> <8519C25C-4840-42A8-BE50-65F1C2BCDEF6@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <8519C25C-4840-42A8-BE50-65F1C2BCDEF6@cisco.com>
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 22:02:47 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ8-QxT901TFZM543J-dR1uPy1UOgOx9f4x4diMtwwytbpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl.all@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e16ae405ceba2798"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/jpMKQheAYoOoKMH5qD8eUxs0gFk>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Which MOP for RPL AODV? (draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 19 Oct 2021 20:03:44 -0000

On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 7:44 PM Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert=
40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

>
> Hello Michael
>
> As long as no one forms a network that has both that should not be a
> problem, should it?
>

So if the WG goes for this option of using 4 for AODV, then yes there is no
options for users to have both in one network.
Currently we have 5 available can be used, with more options for LLNs
users, so why not give more opportunities until future decisions?

AB

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email