Subject: Re: [manet] #16 (dymo): The Reactive Protocol Duplicate Suppression Table

From: "manet issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2014 15:09:05 -0000

#16: The Reactive Protocol Duplicate Suppression Table

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 On 2/20/2013 4:10 PM, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:

 > I agree, but why there is not much attention in the WG for
 unidirectional links?
 > Regarding RREP it can be optional, but I prefer one table for duplicate
 RteMsg,

 > On 2/20/13, Charles E. Perkins <[email-masked]> wrote:

 >> There was a revision of AODVv2 that included RREPs in the duplicate
 >> suppression table.  It did have the effect of making the description
 more
 >> difficult to understand without additional benefit in the typical case
 >> where RREPs are unicast.  For multicast RREP, there would be quite a
 >> bit more benefit, but the use case for multicast RREP involves networks
 >> with unidirectional links, which have not seen much attention lately in
 >> the working group.  Moreover, the duplicate suppression table itself
 >> would need to distinguish between RREQ and RREP messages if they
 >> were combined in the same table, so logically speaking the table could
 >> still be viewed as two separate tables.
 >>
 >> If there is interest, handling multicast RREPs in a similar table could
 >> be more explicitly specified in the document.

-- 
----------------------------------------+--------------------------------
 Reporter:  [email-masked]  |       Owner:  Abdussalam Baryun
     Type:  enhancement                 |      Status:  new
 Priority:  major                       |   Milestone:
Component:  dymo                        |     Version:
 Severity:  Active WG Document          |  Resolution:
 Keywords:  Message suppression         |
----------------------------------------+--------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/manet/trac/ticket/16#comment:2>
manet <http://tools.ietf.org/manet/>