6LoWPAN is not that specific and if every home usage needs a special gateway, we're designing against the end to end principle.
Take the stereo / home theater. This is prone to become an ad hoc network where infrared and cable connections will be replaced by various flavors of 802.15, e.g. Bluetooth for RCA replacement, Zigbee for infrared, and UWB for HDMI. RPL is designed to accommodate that. It can build multiple constrained routing topologies within a same subnet. For instance one topology can be rooted at the screen, and dedicated to video by constraining the links to UWB. And a recent draft allows cascading topologies. Cheers, Pascal From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ray Hunter Sent: mercredi 23 novembre 2011 19:06 To: Howard, Lee Cc: Laurent Toutain; [email protected] Subject: Re: [homenet] other routing options > IMHO increasing use of (overlapping) (low power) wireless networks in Homenet will only make > count to infinity type problems more common, as marginal adjacencies come and go. You mean 6lowpan type networks? I thought we had consensus to draw a circle around them and say, "put a device between that network and this." I agree on 6LoWPAN: it has a clear gateway router, it's own routing protocol, and should not be expected to provide an inter-Homenet link. But you can still have various flavors of WiFi that could be acting as a (marginal) inter-router link, in parallel with copper. What about those? Are they also stub networks that only service end nodes? How do you know? How do you avoid 2 routers forming an OSPF/RIPng adjacency if it's a single SSID just within wireless range of each other? That might be exactly what you want in some cases. > What about multicast support for streaming video to my iDevice as I walk from the lounge to > the pool? AV will likely be a major homenet application. OSPF => MOSPF? IPng => DVMRP? > Or should that use unicast + mobile IPv6? Streaming video != multicast. I don't think we've had any discussion of multicast, except in the context of mDNS. I don't need it in the home. Do you? That was exactly my question. As a consumer I'd like video distributed around my home available to mobile devices: I don't really care how it's transported. The video may well arrive into the home via multicast over cable via DOCSIS. The set top box is in the living room but my TV is in the bedroom. Do we expect people to run the cable TV network to every room to separate set top boxes with their own decryption cards and keep this outside of Homenet? Do we expect AV manufacturers to always unicast video within the Homenet? e.g. if I want my camera with my own copyright content to play on a remote system? Or should we discuss whether the choice of unicast routing protocol has a knock on effect to multicast routing? I'd like to keep things simple too, but I think it's an important scoping question to get clear consensus on. regards, RayH
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
