Subject: [manet] RE: [Autoconf] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-chakeres-manet-iana-00.txt

From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 09:50:53 +0100

Christophe Jelger wrote:
> Thomas Clausen wrote:
>> I do not see what different multicast addresses with identical scope

>> for each component would buy us.

> Networking is about exchanging messages between interested parties. I
> just don't buy the idea that each MANET node will have to read and
parse
> messages for which it might have "no interest": this sounds like spam
to
> me. Moreover having a dedicated mcast addr per protocol is the best
> current practise in the ietf wgs.

It is of course possible to use the same multicast address, but ignore
messages you aren't interested in by using different UDP ports. (OK,
you have to parse the IP and UDP headers, but not the routing protocol
messages.) I'm not arguing for or against this right now, just throwing
it into the mix.

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet

---

From: "Francisco J. Ros" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 11:26:15 +0200

Hello,

> messages.) I'm not arguing for or against this right now, just throwing
Assuming the same mcast address and different ports... Since we don't want 
OLSRv2 and NHDP messages to be disaggregated, then they should use the same 
port, right? Then, a node running DYMO and NHDP would process the routing 
messages sent by a neighbor running OLSRv2.

So, even routing protocol messages are processed by nodes which aren't 
interested in them (unless I'm missing something). Of course, this only 
happens if the nodes implement NHDP, but that's quite likely.

Regards,
fran

______________________________________________ 
LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo. 
Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto. 
http://es.voice.yahoo.com

---

From: David Young <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:25:15 -0500

> messages you aren't interested in by using different UDP ports. (OK,

The difference here is that the NIC's multicast filter may operate without
the host computer even being "awake," but the host CPU will ordinarily
be involved in UDP filtering.  The difference in power consumption
and processing overhead may be substantial.  Then again, maybe not.
This is the kind of thing someone could test in the lab.

Dave

-- 
David Young             OJC Technologies
[email-masked]      Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933