[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[DNA] DNA Protocol vs. Protocol 2
Hello folks,
In my understanding, Brett and Jinhyeock documents
seem to achieve the same goal. I am just curious
to know of why we need two documents not merged
one. Is there any internal decision from DT ?
To me, a single document seems mostly like an
appropriate approach...
Regards,
---------------------------------------------
Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
Mobile Platform Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dna@ecselists.eng.monash.edu.au
> [mailto:owner-dna@ecselists.eng.monash.edu.au] On Behalf Of
> JinHyeock Choi
> Sent: Saturday, May 28, 2005 9:37 AM
> To: greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au
> Cc: dna@eng.monash.edu.au
> Subject: [DNA] [New I-D] DNA Solution: Link Identifier based approach
>
>
> Dear DNA Group
>
> We submitted the following draft as a solution work.
>
> DNA Solution: Link Identifier based approach
> draft-jinchoi-dna-protocol2-00.txt
>
> As Brett mentioned, two approaches were discussed
> in DT, Landmark based & Link Identifier based.
>
> The draft presents the second one and describes how
> to check for link change with the prefix based linkid.
>
> Routers pick the smallest prefix as the linkid prefix and
> include the linkid prefix in every RA. In short, if a host
> sees the same linkid prefix, it is at the same link and if it
> sees a different linkid prefix, it has moved to a new link.
>
> This document is available at the URL:
>
> http://www.diffeo.com/drafts/draft-jinchoi-dna-protocol2-00.txt
>
> We are looking forward to your feedback.
>
> Best Regards
>
> JinHyeock Choi
>
>