[6lo] Lorenzo's comment on sizing the NCE

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 31 July 2017 14:49 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AA9C1323B5 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:49:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z5YoSU7yG7Zv for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:49:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0252132443 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 07:49:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5792; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1501512552; x=1502722152; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=t1VnY7YasW8QGdmJwOCnhgLEm0fofqsPcZPHDq5QNKo=; b=SnnTw/o/DNlVwwQg+EQfHgaBnZEKWBcCT9+m3+F+DhPoAeCOUGwdeFdE eKzwt3qO9hxarSZprlKV5yeKyFcjL45HCPJuhWpOOg1b01hcYvCMxO34i RNPVhyqLkA+vdu/97+TBvuUQHxNGWDmma2Pr2BbExPbmgT8mSe2VwrfEw A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DGAQApQn9Z/5NdJa1bGwEBAQMBAQEJAQEBgm9rZIEbjgaPeZJHhS8OggSJRz8YAQIBAQEBAQEBayiFTF4BgQAmAQQBGolDZLBcizwBAQEBAQEEAQEBAQEBASGDKINNiUYihggFn28ClBySRpVxAR84gQp3FYVaggiIZoExgQ4BAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,442,1496102400"; d="scan'208,217";a="276798525"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jul 2017 14:49:11 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6VEnBvF005665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:49:11 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:49:11 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Mon, 31 Jul 2017 09:49:10 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Thread-Topic: Lorenzo's comment on sizing the NCE
Thread-Index: AdMJ/DViHL2CXanCTLOQVVOEK0SQFw==
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:49:07 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 12:58:29 +0000
Message-ID: <040ac6768987418a80e9cc1c340e313f@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.61.166.241]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_040ac6768987418a80e9cc1c340e313fXCHRCD001ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/51Jovh_tSwvhqM10Zt5CIRZ0Icg>
Subject: [6lo] Lorenzo's comment on sizing the NCE
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:49:20 -0000

Dear all :

I also got a comment from Lorenzo during IETF 99, about the size of NCE, which is potentially larger with the registration mechanism.
Below is text that I'm proposing to add to 08 to address that comment:

"
    Compared to classical IPv6 ND where a router must have enough storage to
    hold neighbor cache entries for all the addresses that are actively used
    through this router, the Address Registration mechanism implies that the
    router must now have enough storage to hold neighbor cache entries for all
    the addresses that may be registered to it, regardless of whether they are
    currently participating to an active conversation or not.
"

This text would precede the existing:
"
    This implies that the capabilities of 6LoWPAN Router (6LR) or 6LoWPAN
    Border Router (6LBR) in terms of number of registrations must be clearly
    announced in the router documentation, and that a network administrator
    should deploy adapted 6LR/6LBRs to support the number and type of devices
    in his network, based on the number of IPv6 addresses that those devices
    require and their renewal rate and behaviour.
"

Works?

Pascal