You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This relates to issue #9415. For a network in this state, Leader must be updated to new code from #9415 which may be insufficient to address the serverity of the issue for the rest of the mesh.
We need a way for updated nodes to police affected leaders. One option could be leader takeover. @abtink described other possibilities, which I do not understand yet.
@ndyck14 the policing mechanism I have in mind is not a small/simple change and may require new text in spec and/or feature design.
The core of the idea is to try to use existing kUriServerData TMF message mechasnim where a device can send a request to leader to remove all netdata for a given RLOC16. This is used today by a parent node when one of its children is removed to request any netdata entry previously added its child to be removed. I beleice the same message/mechansim can be used to have a BR request entries added by another BR to be removed.
in concept, it seems straight forward: a node with updated code can observe netdata and compare it against router table. for any discrepancies, it can set some reasonable timer + jitter after which it checks again, and if the state remains, issues a command to zero the netdata for that RLOC. For now, it does not appear spec expressly prohibits this (although it does seem a slipperly slope). How long might netdata come before an updated router table (the valid case that needs to be distinguished from the otherwise invalid precipitator in #9415)?
This relates to issue #9415. For a network in this state, Leader must be updated to new code from #9415 which may be insufficient to address the serverity of the issue for the rest of the mesh.
We need a way for updated nodes to police affected leaders. One option could be leader takeover. @abtink described other possibilities, which I do not understand yet.
cc @jwhui @BL451
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: