Hello Michael, > On Sep 23, 2018, at 22:38, Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> wrote: > > > Georgios Z. Papadopoulos <georgios.papadopou...@imt-atlantique.fr> wrote: >> Many thanks for this work. Going through the draft, I have a >> comment/question : > >> Considering that “The containing Enhanced Beacon is not encrypted.” >> (Section 3), is it necessary to include “rank priority” at L2 and, >> thus, revealing this information? > > I consider it a concern as well. > > When returning from a deep sleep, where there may be multiple > LLNs on different PANIDs (and in 6tisch, with different schedules, even using > different sets of channels), there is a desire to know which network will > "closer". > > I think that we need to understand the tradeoffs, so let's discuss > (also in the ROLL WG!). Perhaps a compromise is that the rank priority can > be forced to maximum value on networks that want to keep the information > private.
+1 Georgios > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > _______________________________________________ 6tisch mailing list 6tisch@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch
