Subject: [manet] MPR Redundancy in OLSRv2

From: "Teco Boot" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:20:56 +0100

Is MPR Redundancy (section 15 in RFC3626) removed from the OLSRv2 protocol?
Maybe I missed earlier discussions on this.

Thanks, Teco

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

---

From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 15:13:33 -0000

> Is MPR Redundancy (section 15 in RFC3626) removed from the OLSRv2
protocol?

(Only time for a brief reply). In this case, and one or two others,
OLSRv2 is permissive, you can do what you want (specifically, the
Advertised Neighbour Set must include the set of MPR selectors, but
there's no constraint on what else it may include). However the
specific examples of greater than minimum Advertised Neighbour Set
are dropped, as they are just that, examples, and we know from
people's practice that they aren't the only ones. (For example you
could bound the size of the Advertised Neighbour Set, assuming the
set of MPR selectors is less than that bound, filling in up to that
limit, possibly in some prioritised order.)

There is nothing to stop anyone continuing to use the examples in
3626 in an implementation of OLSRv2, but mandating a parameter
(TC_REDUNDANCY) to cover only some options in a wider space is
not necessary or really appropriate.

********************************************************************
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.
********************************************************************