[aodvv2-discuss] Re: More comments
- From: Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 08:45:56 -0700
Hello Lotte,
Follow-up below:
On 4/27/2015 1:33 AM, Lotte Steenbrink wrote:
It is.. Alternatively we could remove the SeqNumList definition from the
Terminology section, because SeqNumList is a Data Element and already defined
in the Data Element table...
Taking SeqNumList out of Terminology is also fine with me :-)
How about...
“This document uses Data Elements containing the message data to compose AODVv2
messages. The meaning of each data Element is detailed in Table 1.”
Looks good to me.
- RREQ.TargSeqNum seems to be set, but never used. Did we miss something?
It's useful for Intermediate RREP.
But then shouldn't it be removed from the main document and only introduced in
the iRREP document you sent out last week?
It's important to keep it in the main spec because otherwise
Intermediate RREP
will be far less likely to work. The Intermediate Router needs to know that
information, but other nodes that DON'T do Intermediate RREP still need to
pass along the information in order to enable the Intermediate Router to
perform the Intermediate RREP.
Alternatively, we could emphasize the such TLVs *MUST* be replicated in
regenerated RREQ messages (or, better, in any regenerated message).
Right now section 10 says "SHOULD", but that should probably be "MUST"
in order to enable future extensibility.
Other documents subdivide TLV space into "MUST" forward, "MUST drop",
"MUST erase", "MUST send error notification", etc. We don't have to go
that far :-) And, besides, we don't own the TLV space.
Regards,
Charlie P.
Other related posts:
