IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6tisch] Tagging join traffic

Thomas Watteyne <thomas.watteyne@inria.fr> Tue, 14 November 2017 06:40 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.watteyne@inria.fr>
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 1DB6F12943C for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:40:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] 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 tDnA48l3AS5s for <6tisch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:40:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA818129443 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:40:46 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.44,393,1505772000"; d="scan'208,217";a="244519174"
Received: from mail-ua0-f175.google.com ([209.85.217.175]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-GCM-SHA256; 14 Nov 2017 07:40:44 +0100
Received: by mail-ua0-f175.google.com with SMTP id w47so9554556uah.3 for <6tisch@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:40:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX6/h6SEXsTg6nxxnd7RpjgOD5D7lMiOdBv2cU70CSZWAEZp/IwY oxedxymXNv32hPLWk8blpiJOtcFvgO7kZnq0tXU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYgmxPVa9d/A9jED5YYQi2j/u1uoSxmGO+Tl5jApp84jYTvJZT82iW7wk78sLU0FBJsR3bJAh7ZnIImn0jA6bo=
X-Received: by 10.159.35.161 with SMTP id 30mr7741582uao.44.1510641643616; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:40:43 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.159.45.143 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:40:22 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1605.1510630096@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
References: <07BA1D2B-2546-4E7B-B722-0CCE1E395BEE@inria.fr> <5691.1509986797@dooku.sandelman.ca> <CADJ9OA9Df8Z+uTOkrRyFVomqQ=FXMZVnsmJoAp5J6FyQLMwM8w@mail.gmail.com> <CADJ9OA_Q1FCsdkpkMcGeWVpt92BzaG3rWMOEKW=Mbe=8Bv78ag@mail.gmail.com> <5995C788-1883-431F-8169-E92F3BF17205@inria.fr> <CADJ9OA-q0+bmH1K67iq0mU7zCSPCBi6wQio-MEJhnpG1-Xpz+A@mail.gmail.com> <9377.1510168348@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <CADJ9OA9o1pjSgJv39e-m_1j0mPEdvp_mfveeetJOEBWXqrQy+w@mail.gmail.com> <FFD6C585-2D29-44F9-BE78-F241591381BA@cisco.com> <CADJ9OA-vesvtP2UNTHc7=h9Dt6hHjsXr+GWvzET_8ApsALwyaw@mail.gmail.com> <1605.1510630096@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
From: Thomas Watteyne <thomas.watteyne@inria.fr>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2017 07:40:22 +0100
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CADJ9OA9gJLZSqaTE4XAshLOdjV+65o+2YixJ8mHvssD-qsFmtw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADJ9OA9gJLZSqaTE4XAshLOdjV+65o+2YixJ8mHvssD-qsFmtw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, 6tisch <6tisch@ietf.org>, Mališa Vučinić <malisa.vucinic@inria.fr>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c0406328d01ad055debaa05"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6tisch/z2PgNNdtkeJddNOA4RO23MIPorA>
Subject: Re: [6tisch] Tagging join traffic
X-BeenThere: 6tisch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 14 Nov 2017 06:40:51 -0000

agreed

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 4:28 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
wrote:

>
> Thomas Watteyne <thomas.watteyne@inria.fr> wrote:
>     > Thanks for the input. Trying to evaluate the overhead of using the
>     > traffic class bits. I assume we want to have one dedicated traffic
>     > class for the join request/reply, which tells nodes NOT to take that
>     > traffic into account for deciding whether to add cells.
>
> I think that you got it right... we we should have an "available bandwidth
> only" class, which is not the same as "best effort".
>
> (We can also use a different instanceID if that reuses code paths better.
>  WAY BACK, I suggested this, but it has other issues)
>
> We might also want to define what "best effort" means in a 6tisch network.
>
>     > - what must be standardized, if anything?
>     > - what would a join request now look like, and what's the hit in
> terms
>     > of byte count?
>
> I think it's one byte at the 6lowRH level to send the bits which were
> otherwise zero and compressed out.
>
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
>


-- 
_______________________________________

Thomas Watteyne, PhD
Research Scientist & Innovator, Inria
Sr Networking Design Eng, Linear Tech
Founder & co-lead, UC Berkeley OpenWSN
Co-chair, IETF 6TiSCH

www.thomaswatteyne.com
_______________________________________

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email