Re: RE : [DNA] Review of draft-yegin-dna-l2-hints-01.txt

[Greg Daley <greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au>]

Hi Jim and Eric,

Here is how I personally see things at the moment.

Bound, Jim wrote:
> This is very important for all to agree what a hint is.  I think I
 > am on same page as Bernard in the abstract that the hint should be
 > internal to the node and stateless if possible. (Bernard if I am way
 > off base here I apologize).  I know today from code that a handheld
 > can detect a new link at layer 1 or 2.  My bias is to develop a DNA
 > mobile solution and only with IPv6 (I believe IPv4 is a non-starter
 > in the market) using hints from layers 1 and 2 and then begin to learn
 > from RA's et al.  Then working on IP layer 3 hints is the second order
 > of business and again that can be done after we get seeing layer 1 and
 > 2 done.  The reason for his is deployment and need will happen
 > faster than this WG can produce results for layer 3.

Just talking about the L2 indications here, I think that I've been
fairly influenced by the previous discussions at the DNA BoFs etc,
and have stopped using the word trigger except for an indication
which doesn't leave the node's own layer 2 (and then I hardly even
call them triggers).

Link-Layer hints, as an indication from L2->L3 are what I've been
calling the entire message (Link UP, SSID:blah ...).  Link UP being
a soft way of describing that generic frames can be sent.

The associated parameters or contents carried in the message
I don't consider separate hints, since the L2 should only be
sending information which it knows about, rather than what it
perceives as useful for the L3 implementation (and may be wrong).


So while an L2 Indication is what is a message containing information
authoritatively known by the originating Link-layer,  it is called
a Link-Layer Hint upon its transmission to the Network-Layer.
This is because although it represents an event at the Link-Layer,
the entire message may be incorrect in detecting "link" change for
the Network-Layer.

The link here being like in "IPv6 link-local" or "link" from
RFC2461.  (I'd not normally qualify this, but we're talking
terminology).

regarding L3 Hints...

I think that we're not chartered to change anything within or above L3,
except the detection but certainly we'd be interested in knowing if
there's a port of the work we're not covering which we ought to.

If there's a task which we need to do, lets get it discussed
(and possibly Bar BoFed, talked over with AD's etc, as is appropriate).


> I still owe response on goals and will do that as best I can I have
 > been on vacation now and prior to that travel.  I am working early in
 > the a.m. mostly during my vacation and will try to provide goals 
response soon.

Thanks Jim,

Your efforts are appreciated, but we also appreciate
the value of a good holiday.

Please enjoy yourself.

Greg