Re: [Roll] NA to transport DAO

["Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert at cisco.com>]

Hi JP,

>> The binding is like a transport. We'll define a different binding but
>> it's still the same generic protocol. Like you can ping over UDP it's
>> still ping.
>>
>> And RPL does not do NA multicast for DAO, but for the specific case
of
>> hosts that would participate to the game.
>
>it does Mcast NA for DOA ...
>
>> Then again the LoWPAN model is
>> a better fit.
>
>RRR ... what do you mean by LoWPAN model ????

Oups, I meant 6LoWPAN ND model vs. the RFC 4861 model from which we
reuse NA. 

The NR/NC model is a better fit for transporting DAO than NA is, because
it creates a registration relationship that's fit for registering a
route as well. Like NEMO registers a prefix over MIPv6 if you wish.

Basically we can benefit from the fact that the state of the route can
be strongly coupled with the state of the registration.

We use NA because in traditional ND that's probably the best we have to
express the child to parent relationship.
But I certainly agree with Julien that it's far from perfect. 

Pascal