IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6lo] draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-00: When to remove VRB entries?

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 07 February 2019 11:41 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 0D58E1310F7 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 03:41:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 AxGMvA_XcoBF for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 03:41:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9::12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3C1012D4F2 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 03:41:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (submithost2.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c8:406a:91ff:fe74:f2b7]) by mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x17BfXIj001377; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 12:41:38 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.217.106] (p54A6CC50.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.166.204.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by submithost.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 43wGcF1BtRz1Br6; Thu, 7 Feb 2019 12:41:33 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <499847d6-337a-4484-972f-18647f8c75be@inria.fr>
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 12:41:32 +0100
Cc: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 571232490.087453-16c0b9e6aa209f236702982a4b98f424
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4F69EDC9-AAAC-4BCD-8493-52BA0D129130@tzi.org>
References: <CALHmdRwqF972Y4DG8x9QW_fg+AkwnQtzUVSgyE77FBYYO0SLpQ@mail.gmail.com> <cc58e1c1-9084-e1dd-91ab-db485a242767@inria.fr> <A448295E-D3AF-45CD-A14A-48FA82A8ABF2@tzi.org> <499847d6-337a-4484-972f-18647f8c75be@inria.fr>
To: Yasuyuki Tanaka <yasuyuki.tanaka@inria.fr>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/U4WklnwmZ2yic8yjG-1eF_kJzzA>
Subject: Re: [6lo] draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment-00: When to remove VRB entries?
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 07 Feb 2019 11:41:43 -0000

On Feb 7, 2019, at 12:36, Yasuyuki Tanaka <yasuyuki.tanaka@inria.fr> wrote:
> 
> Since datagram_tag is expected to be incremented (by one) as RFC4944 specifies, holding the last datagram_tag per peer may be enough, although this kind of thing could be "implementation-specific":

Right.  We don’t want to blackhole datagrams after a reboot, and we want to allow the sending implementation to forget their neighbor state (which might include that counter, if it is not global) after a while.  So I think some form of timeout may be needed.

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email