Re: [Roll] Informed move [was: A proposal for Traffic Loop

["Anders Jagd" <anders.jagd at ekasystems.com>]

Pascal,

You wrote:

>The draft actually allows moving to a higher rank but there's a catch.
>Whereas a node can reattach right away to obtain a better rank, it needs to
play a little dance that includes detach, wait & see before it can >attach
at a higher rank.

Wouldn't the following statement in 03 deal with exactly that "loop-hole" ?

(From 5.3.2.1. Determination of Eligibility for DIO Processing)
2188  If the rank of SRC as reported in the RA-DIO message is higher
2189  than that of the node within the DAG, and SRC is not a DAG
2190  parent, then the RA-DIO message MUST NOT be considered for
2191  further processing

However, my real question is then whether there are any ideas on how to
enforce such a "MUST NOT" (or even detect a violation) ? Some implementation
may try to differentiate itself by ignoring it. Having a rule that is not
detectable/enforceable seems problematic.

/Anders