Carl, If your solution is different from RL-002, why don't you publish it? Perhaps you have solved the problem in a way that avoids this problem. Our front end...
34
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 17, 2006 11:49 pm
Ok, here is a proposal that I hope is agreeable to all concerned. It requires some familiarity with RL-002 and the discussion between Roland and Myself...
35
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 29, 2006 11:58 pm
I want to retract proposal DCM-003 for two reasons: 1) Nobody responded to it 2) It has a nit-picky problem WRT foreign devices. I need to be able to support...
36
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 30, 2006 12:20 am
I have found out how to implement RL-002 in such a way that it does not have the varying B/IP address problem, AND it also does not have some of the foreign...
37
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 30, 2006 12:39 am
Sorry - previous message did not have the attachment. I re-sent it, but it never arrived. Dunno why. I have found out how to implement RL-002 in such a way...
38
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Mar 30, 2006 5:02 pm
I have a lot of the same issues that I have had with previous suggestions. Unfortunately, I have been unable to come up with a solution to these issues other...
39
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 30, 2006 6:33 pm
Ugh... I've not seen an example of translation on incoming packets. That's a bother. Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't know that could happen. You are...
40
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Mar 30, 2006 8:40 pm
IMHO: Three incorrect assumptions that a lot of proposals make are: 1) Assuming that there is only one layer of NAT. In fact, it is far more common that 2...
41
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 30, 2006 9:35 pm
Before I spend time trying to document an example, which implementation do you want a counterexample for? I assume you mean just allowing BDTs to be...
42
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Mar 30, 2006 9:48 pm
I was originally interested in the scenario you were referring to when you mentioned "all the proposals I have seen so far gloss over the impact of foreign...
43
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Mar 31, 2006 3:15 am
NEW! Improved! Attachment included! ________________________________ From: Matsen, Dean (WA26) Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 4:20 PM To:...
45
Swan, Bill (WA26)
swan_bill
Apr 3, 2006 4:12 pm
It's retracted. Bill Swan Chair, ASHRAE/SSPC 135 (BACnet) Engineering Fellow Honeywell Automation and Control Systems Alerton ________________________________ ...
46
Carl Neilson
carlneilson
Apr 3, 2006 6:47 pm
I am assuming that the blue changes are the ones applicable to this revision. Point 2 appears to be redundant (but more clearly stated) than point 5. But I...
47
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Apr 3, 2006 9:34 pm
during my tests, I have seen NAT routers do both. The BAC0 port being retained outside the NAT box does occur, usually. In my case, if there is also a static...
48
Roland Laird
rolandlus
Apr 6, 2006 3:11 pm
Dear IP-WG Attached is RL-002-4. I've modified a bit of wording throughout and have added points 4 and 8 from RL-002-DM-1 to the NAT configuration items. ...
49
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Apr 6, 2006 5:34 pm
Dean IP-WG I see your point from 6.5.3. However, as far as establishing address of BACnet router is concerned, one should note that the "Who-Is/I-Am" method...
50
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Apr 7, 2006 12:33 am
Dear IP-WG: Ok, I have implemented RL-002-4 as described, and there is still a subtle problem. It is not a specific problem with this iteration of RL-002, it...
51
Swan, Bill (WA26)
swan_bill
Apr 7, 2006 6:25 pm
The material preceding this is setup, but I will note for clarification: The foreign device concludes that device 100 is reachable via B/IP address...
52
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Apr 8, 2006 2:24 am
All, I am a little confused by the description of the BBMD & Bacnet-IP device. Are they part of the same hardware? Is 102.168.20.100:47801 the address of the...
53
rlaird@...
rolandlus
Apr 8, 2006 3:13 am
Hi Buddy, I understood the device to be part of the BBMD, and residing on the global BACnet network that the FD joins, otherwise we would not have this problem...
54
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Apr 9, 2006 2:28 am
Hi Roland, I was thinking along the same lines as you are then I realized that there is a subtle interaction here that may mean that this would not work EVEN...
55
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Apr 10, 2006 5:37 pm
Roland, Regarding your last point, I totally agree that this could solve the problem. However, from what I've heard, there is currently a push to require a...
56
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Apr 10, 2006 8:14 pm
I finally have my thoughts together on this, and I think the situation gets ugly for a couple reasons ... First, how common is source address verification on...
57
Matsen, Dean (WA26)
deanmatsen
Apr 10, 2006 8:53 pm
Exactly. It does get ugly around certain issues. RL-002 handles this mostly by making it so that it doesn't matter what the "previous hop" MAC address is,...
58
Roland Laird
rolandlus
Apr 10, 2006 11:14 pm
Bill, RL-001-4 is the latest revision of the IP Functionality Tests. This proposal was voted to be submitted to the SSPC by the IP-WG in Chicago. Please add it...
59
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Apr 11, 2006 11:26 am
Section 6.5.3 paragraph 2 method 4 allows routers to learn router addresses through unicast traffic (specifically responses). ...
60
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Apr 11, 2006 12:07 pm
Btw. I realize this may be a little off topic, but since we have been dealing with router path updates issues I thought this was somewhat relevant. Section...
61
Roland Laird
rolandlus
Apr 12, 2006 7:15 pm
Dean, I put my comments in the body of your email. Roland _____ From: bacnet-ip-wg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bacnet-ip-wg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Buddy...
62
Roland Laird
rolandlus
Apr 12, 2006 7:16 pm
63
Buddy Lott
buddylottatwork
Apr 12, 2006 8:19 pm
Roland, I think you put your comments in the bottom of my email. I hope Dean doesn't take it as an insult that you mistook my writing for his. :-) I take it a...
