Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-kelsey-intarea-mesh-link-establishment-03.txt

Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net> Fri, 15 June 2012 14:48 UTC

Return-Path: <d.sturek@att.net>
X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D06E121F8796 for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:48:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.332
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.267, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Lwfymy9FHWFc for <6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:48:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm30-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (nm30-vm0.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com [66.94.237.86]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 85AC021F870F for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:48:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [66.94.237.195] by nm30.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jun 2012 14:48:18 -0000
Received: from [98.139.244.53] by tm6.access.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jun 2012 14:48:18 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp115.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Jun 2012 14:48:17 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1339771697; bh=T8h+qqj8CRezqE+pPTf+0wRQ4HMDJ5acTT+PMqBwpEI=; h=X-Yahoo-Newman-Id:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:CC:Message-ID:Thread-Topic:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding; b=kjp6qopJ+DebqwOXWOsFNW5XjCO/qrkNPbtMg4VeS9azLBf53rf2KucZiATOai5+PKi5xmvyLUinxxAoS1ZcW4zK0/cDgLIji5JeFqyLCuY4QPtldB7F8GvSI2V8epg/Td0lJWOwLu1d9PwsdypJAlfEyvfZ+YMk+f2idhOPS8k=
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 982799.5990.bm@smtp115.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-YMail-OSG: .qiTxgkVM1k3aIeXEKHrtOlsGJJxuV6EL1j3Da0PgBhgAtj 5kE6DG_h1svGeQfTZi8M7OjjPLRU9EN2Qvr4McxQj0F9cXEHDxyEIK5YM31N DeyBhHLDupelzqlI3rtAWRIZSAh1fG0FoaROKwqxflNzLZtYbqd2zs.Q6wVP oAZrd0AbMlOSAhMickVD9k66kBk0k9pWQuTQfAQ.mrO7k30SICQuOtC0WEZv Zjkdxnp8aivqnI65HY_iQopcH.SCLhV.Z2LWQzmT_xmpiyVyQJRfWMQ6t8ra ou569zgbf8tr1eI68PxG8kmpkJ1Ml30amt.XaMr39etG.Jz7Rshyw.Db8Sm. mC1DujFt7Ih2oFxJahKOGy6mHCPoAanVHNJBZSsGdBmX7XGPuecbbXlmj_OJ GsTqyi3FtEaqi6ujM4c09zpX1uQQhySHiVMrvMoSBtmp.F.kMxlUWXWLkxse azJ_MFKBWuO3QR1h8h9MsZINnCJsiQX7eZLRARwuFDEbLLkBfkwj8jZ5le00 hvExBopTKApKBVcrqQ1wS5VM5KA--
X-Yahoo-SMTP: fvjol_aswBAraSJvMLe2r1XTzhBhbFxY8q8c3jo-
Received: from [192.168.43.94] (d.sturek@208.54.80.212 with login) by smtp115.sbc.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Jun 2012 07:48:17 -0700 PDT
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.2.120421
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 07:45:15 -0700
From: Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Message-ID: <CC0096F2.170B8%d.sturek@att.net>
Thread-Topic: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-kelsey-intarea-mesh-link-establishment-03.txt
In-Reply-To: <10344.1339770645@marajade.sandelman.ca>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Cc: "<roll@ietf.org>" <roll@ietf.org>, "<6lowpan@ietf.org>" <6lowpan@ietf.org>, "<ipv6@ietf.org>" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] [Roll] draft-kelsey-intarea-mesh-link-establishment-03.txt
X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowpan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 14:48:22 -0000

Hi Michael,

It is the process needed to make additions to ICMP.   We have multiple
implementers using the existing MLE draft so we also are trying to get
closure if we can since we plan to being commercial certification shortly.

To us, MLE provides the features we need and there is ownership that does
not rely on ourside work groups.  If others find use in MLE (and we
believe they will) then it is offered as a draft to the IETF community.
If the protocol fundamentally changes and has dependencies on other
groups, I would doubt it would be ready for implementation in our
timeframe.

Don





On 6/15/12 7:30 AM, "Michael Richardson" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:

>
>>>>>> "Don" == Don Sturek <d.sturek@att.net> writes:
>    Don> We believe UDP makes the most sense as a transport for MLE.
>ICMP will
>    Don> take entirely too long and will end up being a maintenance issue
>if there
>    Don> are additional information exchanges needed using MLE.
>
>I can't see a difference myself in "length of time", unless you mean
>time to change hardware/firmware/software.
>
>ICMP is even 4 bytes shorter than UDP.
>
>-- 
>Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/
>