[6tisch] Cell types for 6top protocol

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Fri, 08 January 2016 18:15 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A42F51B2AC1 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:15:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 ILu0EKUHKAdj for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:15:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8363F1B2AD3 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 10:15:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10283; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1452276947; x=1453486547; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=0xixMUKAsLEKS7g/aUGwBHGErkYFWEfu1Fkkd7dt2bk=; b=T7jnIdLjHt4zOc5ySeNGpAzrlYALZKw10TiyP1NnS7kDbbYmT8jDQGBj e8u8Fj8/VU16ErYzGafZtsLxtrwMsd+ho73g4Np6O+WZigpvWI9WER2F9 lKBaS4CspdaCmfcdN8SYJ5J08zzl345rtDUnh8x2sasI8QE5yQI3G3zm3 E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AMAgCz+49W/5pdJa1egm5MUnOIU7NIAQ2BZIcvOBQBAQEBAQEBfwuEOy1eAYEAJgEEG4gnoUqgIAEBAQEGAQEBAQEBHYZWjjsFlw0BgQ6MQo8Cjk0BIAEBQoQKhUuBCAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,539,1444694400"; d="scan'208,217";a="225495118"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 08 Jan 2016 18:15:46 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (xch-rcd-004.cisco.com [173.37.102.14]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u08IFkTU027288 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 18:15:46 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:15:45 -0600
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 12:15:46 -0600
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Cell types for 6top protocol
Thread-Index: AdFKPtDw8LATN8fxQD+j6ZPR3WjTFA==
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 2016 18:15:43 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 18:15:37 +0000
Message-ID: <6a9ddd8de9314e88a4c6f7be84ea7d5b@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: [10.61.166.213]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6a9ddd8de9314e88a4c6f7be84ea7d5bXCHRCD001ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/BiLJpSJG9zteqxLgT3dmysTCu9s>
Subject: [6tisch] Cell types for 6top protocol
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 08 Jan 2016 18:15:53 -0000

Dear all :

I took an action item at the 6tisch interim to address cell types in the 6top protocol:

As you know, a chunk is like a malloc heap, a set of resources that a node ( a RPL parent) attributes to be able to serve dynamic bandwidth needs with the 6top protocol.
Currently, the assumption was that the chunks are a partition of the CDU matrix, so chunks are not overlapping, and all cells in chunked space are identical, meant for dedicated unicast traffic like we foresee for tracks.
I pointed out at the interim today that for statistical traffic we may want to have overlapping chunks, in which case cells from different chunks but overlapping chunks may have a chance of collision *.
We discussed that the requester of cells in the 6top protocol may have a say on which type of cell is to be allocated, like high priority, unicast vs. shared, guaranteed non overlapping vs not.
This raises a number of questions:


1)      Do people see value in doing that?

2)      If so, should a chunk have properties, like should cells in a chunk have homogeneous properties?

3)      Should the type (unicast vs. shared) be a permanent property of the cell while it is free (it sits in a chunk), or one attributed by the parent when the cell is placed in a bundle and for the direction of that attribution?

What do you think?

Pascal

* note there is some Cisco IPR around overlapping chunks that that I need to dig if we pursue this direction.