Re: [6tisch] draft-tiloca-6tisch-robust-scheduling-01 --- rekeying permutation key

Michael Richardson <> Fri, 05 April 2019 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E28120167; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5LWZD-aq8ZIv; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28CEF12011A; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8DC838277; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 18:23:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by (Postfix, from userid 179) id 52C6317DA; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 18:24:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502F6DF6; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 18:24:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <>
To: =?us-ascii?Q?=3D=3Futf-8=3FB=3FTWFsacWhYSBWdcSNaW5pxIc=3D=3F=3D?= <>
cc: Marco Tiloca <>, 6tisch <>,
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <5427.1554253601@localhost> <> <8081.1554386670@localhost> <> <10538.1554392453@localhost> <> <31163.1554488119@localhost> <>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2019 18:24:05 -0400
Message-ID: <5963.1554503045@localhost>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] draft-tiloca-6tisch-robust-scheduling-01 --- rekeying permutation key
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2019 22:24:09 -0000

Mališa Vučinić <> wrote:
    >> If we could delay the switch to the new schedule until *after*
    >> COJP_REKEYING_GUARD_TIME has elapsed, then that might work.
    >> Alternatively, if we could number the rekeys then a EB could signal
    >> the switch to the new schedule some time after the keys are changed.

    > Not sure about that the exact switch after COJP_REKEYING_GUARD_TIME
    > would work, different nodes receive the new keys at different instants
    > so it would be hard to sync them. I like better the trigger with an EB,
    > it originates at 6LBR that is trusted and the frame can be
    > authenticated by the nodes that have installed the new keys.

So we need to add a permutation index to the key update that
robust-scheduling provides, and then it needs to allocate a
IE value.

Oh: chairs, I think we should adopt this document.  I know you didn't ask
yet.  I think it's useful enough to make it part of the base architecture!

Michael Richardson <>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-