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

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 05 April 2019 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E28120167; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:24:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5LWZD-aq8ZIv; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [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 ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28CEF12011A; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 15:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8DC838277; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 18:23:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 52C6317DA; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 18:24:05 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 502F6DF6; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 18:24:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: =?us-ascii?Q?=3D=3Futf-8=3FB=3FTWFsacWhYSBWdcSNaW5pxIc=3D=3F=3D?= <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr>
cc: Marco Tiloca <marco.tiloca@ri.se>, 6tisch <6tisch@ietf.org>, draft-tiloca-6tisch-robust-scheduling@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <31107CBF-3BD5-4466-B837-F9F837340C68@inria.fr>
References: <5427.1554253601@localhost> <6ec51921-6dd6-78d4-9b5d-bde9ad40b35c@ri.se> <8081.1554386670@localhost> <B222C2F7-084F-4CBA-A55D-720619058D38@inria.fr> <10538.1554392453@localhost> <5B3CDDA6-E057-4486-B2C2-3BD9E369F6D9@inria.fr> <31163.1554488119@localhost> <31107CBF-3BD5-4466-B837-F9F837340C68@inria.fr>
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/GdgNqNFGpcTRLCm4BI1O6BS36OE>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] draft-tiloca-6tisch-robust-scheduling-01 --- rekeying permutation key
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
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" <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, 05 Apr 2019 22:24:09 -0000

Mališa Vučinić <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr> 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 <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-