> 1) DNCP allows an option of whether a network state TLV contains optional > nested payload (HNCP) TLV's or not.
I'm pretty sure that's not the case. RFC 7787 Section 7.2.2. The Network-State TLV only contains the network state hash, short Node-State TLVs are separate top-level TLVs. An implementation may choose to send them in the same packet, but they're independent TLVs and can be sent in different packets. > 2) The node requesting a node status TLV doesn't know in advance how big a > reply packet will be generated. > DNCP states that nodes MUST reply to all node status TLV queries. The replying node MUST reply to all node state queries. However, it is up to the replying node whether these replies are sent in a single packet or split into multiple packets. In other words, the only constraint is that every single node state TLV must be sent in its entirety within a single packet. As described in a previous mail, this does bound the amount of data that a single node can publish, but no bounds on the total size of the network. > So requesting multiple node status TLV's in one packet could lead to an > oversized UDP reply packet. The replying node's behaviour has nothing to do with whether the requests are aggregated in a single packet or not. The replying node processes each request independently, whether it finds them in a single packet or in multiple packets. -- Juliusz _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
