Hi, Wired or Wireless is not really the point. I think we should rather draw a line between the Lossy and the Very Reliable Networks (which is often tight to the power/size/cost constraints).
I think a routing protocol can run over wired or wireless links, as soon as it is a route-over protocol. The real point is the set of requirements taken into considerations for the design of the routing protocol. For instance, we use RPL over PLC (wired) and 802.15.4 (wireless) because they both fall in the LLN category (which is indeed not restricted to wireless links). To my mind it is clear that we have to use a route-over protocol if we consider multiple technologies (which I believe is a correct assumption in a home). Some examples to illustrate my opinion : Lossy Wired : Some PLC technologies (See AMI technologies). Reliable Wired : Ethernet Lossy Wireless : 802.15.4 Reliable Wireless : Wifi Finally, I really agree with a previous remark on the list who states that the single magic routing protocol is hard to find. We may use some routing protocols, depending on the type of devices we think will be used in the home. A remark about this statement : "I think OSPF or IS-IS (or even EIGRP) can be adapted to the low power/lossy network situation, it just takes some thought and care." This doesn't seems to be compliant with the protocol survey which has been done by the ROLL WG : See Figure 1 here : http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-roll-protocols-survey-07#page-14 Best, Cédric. Le 3 oct. 2011 à 22:53, Ulrich Herberg a écrit : Hi, On Mon, Oct 3, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Russ White <ru...@riw.us<mailto:ru...@riw.us>> wrote: Can you also say the opposite that rotocols developed for wireless work equally well also for wired environments ? If so let me ask why do we need both classes of routing protocols ? I have deployed OLSRv2 both on Ethernet and on wireless environments, without problems. I do not see a reason why OLSRv2 could not run in mixed environments. I would argue that the OSPF MANET extensions would work just as well for IS-IS or OSPF in both wirelss and wired networks. The OSPF MANET extensions would certainly be a valid alternative to consider. Which one performs better or is more suited (OLSRv2 / OSPF+MANET / ...) -- I don't know, that would be an interesting comparison. If not I am not sure homenet should focus on wireless router to router communication at all. Yes I am in favor of wired env with fiber or with nice cat 7 wiring between my routers. I am as well, but I think we should allow for both with a single protocol as much as possible. I agree. Not everyone likes long cables in a home environment. And having a single protocol would be indeed better. I think OSPF or IS-IS (or even EIGRP) can be adapted to the low power/lossy network situation, it just takes some thought and care. We have invested that thought and care in MANET for years now. I think it could be worth investing the suitability of the protocols developed in MANET (as well as the OSPF MANET extensions), before reinventing the wheel. Ulrich Russ _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org<mailto:homenet@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org<mailto:homenet@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
