Re: [DNA] DNA and TSLLAO

[James Kempf <kempf@docomolabs-usa.com>]

Hi Greg,

> Just clarifying: if TSLLAO was folded into DNA, then I guess
> we'd only need the part with RS from an Optimistic address
> (the part I've already implemented ;-) ,
> without NS or Directed Multicast?
>

I think we could fold the NS usage into DNA too, since testing for
bidirectional reachability could arguably be part of detecting attachment
(if you suspect you've lost attachment, this is one way you might want to
check). Alternatively, one could view the DNA RS/RA as another way to do
attachment checking, and therefore that NS/NA checking isn't necessary, in
which case the NS could be dropped.

With regard to Directed Multicast, I'm not sure I see a general use for
this, can you give some examples? Typically multicast is used when the IP
address is undefined.

            jak