Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180
"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Tue, 28 August 2018 05:45 UTC
Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
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 66167130E45 for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 22:45:47 -0700 (PDT)
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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QBO-vrRq2EKI for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 22:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 983C8130DC0 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Aug 2018 22:45:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1738; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1535435145; x=1536644745; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=yPXZJMPowGvgHTlGXQSbBai3cj42AIKN2i1oVwh3npM=; b=UCLioZy/0HzLmh8kElAhTimx3PxbdsgteYre5L6j3j2MWbrPWN5gvvHt fCCq1wkBcGPbPgomcfCg5r6jWcp5P+Sal2T0FY53obyxzrKfa6UZv5WD3 Jvy7XvnZ2y12IiwuIkdqXNF5BdY385ZTZKDrB+JW3/vPx1ulJaUD/UZyC 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AyBACi4IRb/4MNJK1aGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEIAQEBAYNPgWQog3GUOYINgz2SaRSBZguEbAIXgxQhNhYBAgEBAgEBAm0ohTgBBAEjEUUFCwIBCBoCJgICAjAVEAIEDgWDIYF6CKMegS6Ea4V+gQuISxeBQT+BOR+CHi6BQYMdAQEHgxgxgiYCmywJAo9tF45JkyICERSBJCQLJoFScBVlAYI+gjGOIm+KYoI7AQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.53,298,1531785600"; d="scan'208";a="447221023"
Received: from alln-core-1.cisco.com ([173.36.13.131]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Aug 2018 05:45:44 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (xch-aln-005.cisco.com [173.36.7.15]) by alln-core-1.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w7S5jiaj017049 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 28 Aug 2018 05:45:44 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-ALN-005.cisco.com (173.36.7.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1367.3; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 00:45:43 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1367.000; Tue, 28 Aug 2018 00:45:43 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Yasuyuki Tanaka <yasuyuki.tanaka@inria.fr>
CC: "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180
Thread-Index: AQHUOx7w1BLw+18cWk+KaCmoiUOFR6TTstZwgABqggCAAJEirA==
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 05:45:43 +0000
Message-ID: <8C4B9578-5AA2-443E-8F9F-B8F85C93E587@cisco.com>
References: <750B2894-1067-4F5E-A634-CCCF7AB558E8@inria.fr> <b937ef6d7e4a48ddbc79f7c2b6ab9097@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>, <59BAA8BB-7EFF-4EF6-A52A-0FB6290574F6@inria.fr>
In-Reply-To: <59BAA8BB-7EFF-4EF6-A52A-0FB6290574F6@inria.fr>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.15, xch-aln-005.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-1.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/ZlF1A2Vn6NmtUxQOTODQ9OKOCuo>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 05:45:48 -0000
Hello Yatch: I agree; thus my quote of RFC 6206 in the other mail. Now even if we do not do an erratum, an implementation should not schedule a transmission faster than it can send; iow I should be reset to Imin but rounded to the next minimal slot or the next mcast slot available. A node should not have multiple DIOs in xmit queue. Regards, Pascal > Le 27 août 2018 à 18:06, Yasuyuki Tanaka <yasuyuki.tanaka@inria.fr> a écrit : > > Thank you, Pascal! > >> [PT>] True, so we never reach 9 and stay compatible with OF0. I guess the max ETX of 3 is arbitrary, we could have gone up to 11/3... > > OK! That is what I understood. It's very clear now. > >> The initial value of I (see RFC 6206) is between Imin and Imax. With the default, that is between 8ms and 2.3 hours. Hopefully I is not always 8ms! The DIO will not fire before I/2. > > > Regarding the Trickle timer, yes, the initial value of "I" is chosen between Imin and Imax. And it's not always 8ms. > > But, "I" is reset to Imin (8 ms) when Trickle hears something "inconsistent". After that, "I" will be just doubled at the end of interval: 16ms, 32ms, 64ms, ... This could pile up DIOs in the TX queue and consume bandwidth for nothing. :-/ > > Best, > Yatch
- [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Yasuyuki Tanaka
- Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Yasuyuki Tanaka
- Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Yasuyuki Tanaka
- Re: [6tisch] Questions on RPL Settings in RFC 8180 Pascal Thubert (pthubert)