Le 15/06/2010 00:21, Manfredi, Albert E a écrit :
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-boun...@ietf.org
[mailto:ipv6-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian Haberman
All, This is a consensus call to determine if there is interest in
having 6MAN adopt the two RPL drafts (draft-hui-6man-rpl-option and
draft-hui-6man-rpl-routing-header). Please state your opinion on
the mailing list by June 25th, 2010.
It would be interesting to see discussion of how ROLL and MANET do or
do not overlap in their intended use cases. ROLL seems far less
chaotic than MANET, however MANET would ideally be able to subsume
the ROLL roles very nicely.
As a side note, IMHO RoLL activity seems just as chaotic as earlier
MANET activity: many drafts, loss of focus, continuous divergence, much
simulation, too little implementation, disparate terminology, hidden
private discussions, incoherent decisions. I can see intense activity -
yes. Chaos?...
On another hand - a big issue with RoLL is still the fact that it uses
no aspect whatsoever from MANET. They run independently, despite the
obvious similarities.
I will go back and read the 6MAN RPL proposals.
RPL routing headers? DSR from MANET.
Alex
However, given that the use cases of ROLL are outside the scope of
the question, then I support the RH4 solution.
Bert
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative
Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
