On Sat, 4 Jul 2015, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
These things need to be clearly explained to the naive implementor.
I've been deliberately copying the list with all of my questions (sorry
for the spam) so that we can have a record. Now somebody (somebody with
strong nerves) needs to go through m
>> Section 4.4 of DNCP says that the NODE-STATE TLVs sent in reply to
>> a REQ-NODE-STATE MUST NOT contain the optional part.
> I assume you are talking about REQ-NET-STATE. The underlying problem here
[...]
> Now that we discuss it, I think SHOULD NOT might be correct, though; if
> you haven't
On 4.7.2015 0.28, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
Markus, Steven,
Section 4.4 of DNCP says that the NODE-STATE TLVs sent in reply to
a REQ-NODE-STATE MUST NOT contain the optional part. Why is that? If
I've recently republished my own data (e.g. because I gained a neighbour),
it makes sense to me to
Markus, Steven,
Section 4.4 of DNCP says that the NODE-STATE TLVs sent in reply to
a REQ-NODE-STATE MUST NOT contain the optional part. Why is that? If
I've recently republished my own data (e.g. because I gained a neighbour),
it makes sense to me to send my own NODE-STATE in order to avoid a ro
> Yep, intentionally so for now; of course, we could turn it even more in
> the scalable (routing) protocol direction if there is desire.
That's not quite what I meant. I'll try to put it differently.
Right now, an HNCP node performs the following actions:
1. participate in Trickle-based floodi
On 25/02/2015 21:15, Markus Stenberg wrote:
> On 25.2.2015, at 0.56, Juliusz Chroboczek
> wrote:
should not send packets larger than 1500 octets unless it has assurance
that the destination is capable of reassembling packets of that larger
size.
>>> I guess this is another MUST to
On 25.2.2015, at 1.10, Juliusz Chroboczek
wrote:
>>> Another question -- is it possible to participate in Trickle-driven
>>> flooding without building the full topology graph?
>
>> The current answer based on strict reading of the spec is no.
> [...]
>> Is this desirable to be changed? Probably
On 25.2.2015, at 0.56, Juliusz Chroboczek
wrote:
>>> should not send packets larger than 1500 octets unless it has assurance
>>> that the destination is capable of reassembling packets of that larger
>>> size.
>> I guess this is another MUST to be added to HNCP text (DNCP itself is
>> not IPv6-sp
>> Another question -- is it possible to participate in Trickle-driven
>> flooding without building the full topology graph?
> The current answer based on strict reading of the spec is no.
[...]
> Is this desirable to be changed? Probably so.
There's not only the stub case that you consider, but
>> should not send packets larger than 1500 octets unless it has assurance
>> that the destination is capable of reassembling packets of that larger
>> size.
> I guess this is another MUST to be added to HNCP text (DNCP itself is
> not IPv6-specific as such).
You mean that every HNCP node MUST ba
On 23.2.2015, at 18.51, Juliusz Chroboczek
wrote:
> Another question -- is it possible to participate in Trickle-driven
> flooding without building the full topology graph?
>
> If not, that's a little disappointing, since Trickle is designed so that
> it can be implemented while knowing just my
On 23.2.2015, at 17.24, Juliusz Chroboczek
wrote:
>> post MTU, or in secure mode, it should just use the Short one (which is
>> of fixed length).
> Ok. So I send multicast SNS. I receive NSR. I'm supposed to send LSR,
> right? But it doesn't fit in maximum packet size, even with fragmentation
>> The minimum MTU in IPv6 is 1280 bytes, and the minimum maximum packet size
>> (before fragmentation) is 1500 bytes.
> I assume you refer to Long Network Status (on multicast);
Yes, sorry.
> post MTU, or in secure mode, it should just use the Short one (which is
> of fixed length).
Ok. So I
On 23.2.2015, at 4.57, Juliusz Chroboczek
wrote:
> I have a few questions and comments about DNCP. (I haven't finished
> grokking HNCP yet, so that will have to wait.)
Thanks, we definitely need more eyes on this (keepalive logic was actually
flawed in -00, but I dare you to find it without lo
I have a few questions and comments about DNCP. (I haven't finished
grokking HNCP yet, so that will have to wait.)
1. Fragmentation
The minimum MTU in IPv6 is 1280 bytes, and the minimum maximum packet size
(before fragmentation) is 1500 bytes. This means that a Short Network
Status can carry
15 matches
Mail list logo
