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

[Alper Yegin <alper.yegin@samsung.com>]

OK, this is a good angle to discuss. I think another cause of difference
is about where we stand when we look at the L2->L3 info exchange. 

> 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 at best can be "upon processing by DNA module". I think downgrade
from indication (or trigger) to hint would be specific to the DNA. Some
other consumer of such L2 information might not have the same usage of
this information. And we rather establish a common framework, unless we
want to see the same thing called differently among different
technologies (DNA, MOBOPTS, MIPSHOP, etc.).

I think it is perfectly fine to say "triggers/indications and the
associated information is used as a hint by DNA" in the DNA solutions
draft (and explain how exactly they are used).

Before the terminology gets all tangled, here is what I think:
- it is OK to call it an "L2 indication".
- I'd say an indication is generated as a result of a L2 event. It can
carry an event name (link up, link down for DNA) and optionally some
auxiliary data (IP address, L2 access point address, etc.)

For now it suffices to define the events and auxiliary data types that
are relevant to DNA. But in the future, some other WG can extend
this....

Does this makes sense?

> 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.

This is a view from within DNA.... 

Alper

> 
> 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