Fun, I had a parallel experience with NEMO that I implemented in IOS. But I mostly read the fate of MIP and NEMO as a lack of ask. Which is similar to the lack of desire today for the uplifts we made to IPv6 as a whole, and ND in particular.
Anyway, RPL has a lot to do with what we learned there, including the abstract objective function that yields the metrics you are talking about, typically including things like ETX/ETX^2, RSSI and LQI. So yes, things that make sense eventually emerge. Keep safe. Pascal > -----Original Message----- > From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simp...@gmail.com> > Sent: jeudi 31 mars 2022 14:10 > To: nanog@nanog.org > Cc: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthub...@cisco.com>; Masataka Ohta > <mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> > Subject: Re: IPv6 "bloat" history > > On 3/31/22 7:44 AM, William Allen Simpson wrote: > > [heavy sigh] > > > > All of these things were well understood circa 1992-93. > > > > That's why the original Neighbor Discovery was entirely link state. > > > > ND link state announcements handled the hidden terminal problem. > > Also, it almost goes without saying that the original ND tried to handle the > near-far problem. For example, where I'm talking to a far away AP streaming > to the TV in front of me. > > At my home, I've had to wire the TV. Streaming to the AP, then the AP > sending the same traffic over the same wireless band to the TV caused lots of > drops and jitter. > > The near-far problem can be detected and solved. That's the reason for the > Metric field. > > Furthermore, one of the messages in this thread mentioned trying to backport > v6 features to v4. > > We've already been down that road. IPsec and MobileIP were developed for v6. > After quitting the v6 project(s), I'd backported both of them to v4. Like > v6, then they were assigned to others who ruined them. > Committee-itis at its worst.
