Re: [Roll] New Version Notification for draft-ko-roll-mix-network-pathology-00.txt

Hi Abdussalam,

Thanks for your quick comments :)

My comments in-line.

On Aug 17, 2012, at 11:06 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

> Hi John,
>  
> I like the work, as I always beleive that LLN is has mixed nodes of different  capabilities,
> the work I am doing has in the routing aspects similar which is about node ability NAP [*]. However, I support your work as well,
>  
> Comments on your draft 00:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> section 4>N is operating in non-storing mode so without a source routing
> header, it will forward the packet back to S. Thus the packet bounces
> between N and S.
>  
> A node should not forward to prefered next-hop towice, or it should never forward (while it doesn't know the path to destination) to a node which already send the packet to it.

I can improve the text in -01 so that eventually an ICMPv6 error message is initiated.

> ----------------
> section 5>A new mode of operation (MOP) that allows a node to choose either
>    to implement the storing or non-storing features, or both.  The
>    changes below are made compared to the original storing and non-
>    storing modes.
>  
> you may add, that there are alot of LLN possibility of it nodes non-store and store modes, as destinations maybe store or/and non-store and the root also maybe store and/or non-store. IMO, this section is still not complete to cover all possibilities.

I see your point (partially). We need to add to the draft that the root of the DODAG in a MOP 5 operation should have route storing capabilities. What's really important, as the draft indicates is if the next hop has route storing capabilities or not. With this determined, if the next hop is a route storing node the sender can just transmit the packet right away. On the other hand if the next hop does not have this capability, a SRH needs to be attached. 

>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> In my work [*] I name this operation mode you refer, as node ability. The node will choose the mode depending on the ability metric. However, your draft is interesting because this pathology function will be within the routing RPL function and depending on OF.
>  

Not sure here but for sure the proposed draft does not require a specific OF (if this is what you are implying). As long as there is a DODAG (constructed with any OF) the proposal is a small addition to the original storing and non-storing mode implementations. 

Thanks!

-John

> [*] http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-baryun-roll-nap-00.txt
>  
> Best Regards
>  
> Abdussalam Baryun
> University of Glamorgan, UK
> ======================
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll