[6tisch] FW: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Fri, 18 March 2016 10:56 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C23D712D8D0 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 03:56:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.521
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.521 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_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 ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mMP80R2H512E for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 03:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EF1C12D51B for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 03:56:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=20764; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1458298562; x=1459508162; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=QL+qQ6lzu1MKvobrwmuhcrBwLI8f8o/RW9oertywB8w=; b=ZMMU647x0RmRzuGsxm3ZN6d3CXs6IwauXJewWy39Of48GD+UvYqaGdhV QyhHzbO9pTmAh6YAPu/6jNChSeWgmhzqvBufaX32NFJBukCBFk1HzTYgA u8WV9XqKhlVaL+CpwqcaKJn9KZJ16B3P2gGRKL43ikIVLQK9Ap0KVxuIo s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,354,1454976000"; d="scan'208,217";a="250821870"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Mar 2016 10:56:00 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com []) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2IAu0mS003372 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:56:00 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ( by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 05:55:59 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 05:55:59 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL
Thread-Index: AdGAmop9h2qYFLg/TgebhfKJtHrSXwAZ6IKwAAB8nwA=
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:55:42 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:54:53 +0000
Message-ID: <b2714d8449674728b90fafc8f50d8186@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <BN1PR03MB0725DAF0801633B06EB4018958B0@BN1PR03MB072.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <0a3e093af6aa4648abc0ed798d92ae5c@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <0a3e093af6aa4648abc0ed798d92ae5c@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_b2714d8449674728b90fafc8f50d8186XCHRCD001ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/25cnQR85C32MDL85Aq3iRQOkk04>
Subject: [6tisch] FW: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tisch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6tisch/>
List-Post: <mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch>, <mailto:6tisch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:56:07 -0000


There is a pending adoption call at 6lo for the https://tools.ietf.org/wg/6lo/draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch/, please contribute.

At the same time, the 6LoRH draft that depends on it may transition to ROLL to complete the work. I see that as a good thing since the formatting iis agreed upon and that the nits may now be on the protocol side. Please contribute there as well!



From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Sent: vendredi 18 mars 2016 11:47
To: Gabriel Montenegro <Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com>; draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch@tools.ietf.org; 6lo@ietf.org; Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Cc: 6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org; roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org; Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>; Alvaro Retana (aretana) <aretana@cisco.com>; Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>; James Woodyatt (jhw@nestlabs.com) <jhw@nestlabs.com>; Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>; Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net>
Subject: RE: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL

Hello Gabriel:

That is perfectly fine with me, and I have 2 procedural questions:

1)      Can I submit as draft-roll or do we need an adoption call there?

2)      Draft -6lorh is stable, ready to last call IMHO.  The critical decisions involving formats and header orders are probably already taken. What may be still subject to discussion and that is of specific value to ROLL is bit mapping to protocols or things like that. Since we are transitioning areas, it would be good that 6lo expresses a blessing of the current shape and form so that unless there is a major change, we do not need to recirculate the document again through areas to go to IESG. Based on the fact that 6lo adopted it in the first place, will 6lo be happy that the ROLL WG completes the editorial work on RPL relayed semantics and ships from routing area without handing back the result?



From: Gabriel Montenegro [mailto:Gabriel.Montenegro@microsoft.com]
Sent: jeudi 17 mars 2016 23:16
To: draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch@tools.ietf.org>; draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch@tools.ietf.org>; 6lo@ietf.org<mailto:6lo@ietf.org>; Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org<mailto:roll@ietf.org>>
Cc: 6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org>; roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org>; Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca<mailto:mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>>; Alvaro Retana (aretana) <aretana@cisco.com<mailto:aretana@cisco.com>>; Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com<mailto:suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com>>; James Woodyatt (jhw@nestlabs.com<mailto:jhw@nestlabs.com>) <jhw@nestlabs.com<mailto:jhw@nestlabs.com>>; Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>>; Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net<mailto:brian@innovationslab.net>>
Subject: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL

Hi folks,

We've had some discussions among the 6lo and ROLL chairs and personnel as well as the responsible AD's (Brian, Alvaro and Suresh) to the effect that the following draft (aka 6lorh) is better suited for ROLL than 6lo:

*        https://tools.ietf.org/wg/6lo/draft-ietf-6lo-routing-dispatch/

This draft uses the framework established in the paging-dispatch draft, which is clearly in 6lo's scope:

*        https://tools.ietf.org/wg/6lo/draft-ietf-6lo-paging-dispatch/

We're moving 6lorh (routing-dispatch) to ROLL. Sure, 6lorh uses something out of 6lo (the paging-dispatch draft), but it is so specific to ROLL that the document belongs there.

This is analogous to how DHC has operated over many years: base DHCP format changes happen in DHC, but applications of DHC mechanisms specific to any given technology are best developed by the relevant WG (of course, with review by DHC to double-check the use of DHC facilities).

Similarly, 6lo will be in the loop to review routing-dispatch, to make sure it uses paging-dispatch properly. But routing-dispatch is so specific to ROLL that further development, WG LC, IESG processing, etc., will happen under ROLL.


Gabriel (on behalf of ROLL and 6LO chairs)