Re: [6tsch] About the special type of event to ask PCE to create a track

Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu> Wed, 04 September 2013 02:13 UTC

Return-Path: <twatteyne@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3BF321E80D9 for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.220, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_34=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id drok1mmePxPR for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:13:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-x230.google.com (mail-pb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10FE521F99BD for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:13:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ma3so6676438pbc.7 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 19:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=sS/uV9w3cqzAZsFdoDw+g/yS360EVFmphOzsxHn6U4o=; b=mAFqikYkkA3vILDNIJzwb9mi6sOdbKR60XwOpwycq+1QG+P1qU0kNzdoT+yxPI72VK z/STu4gunk70h4BByziUVQbC2Xa2HTSJA0vUC7XYZ+TCUVRis0b7dHyDP0PRSSibTJiL 0IN+evognzDqy0mSJ7poUGcEc+bSATYjeI4kuxQSll/3/1yDJGdVkCPKyGW9/E6r81k4 mPITE1GjMaaehzLFo7K4W3j2ytjbBPSIOaqH2bU8/OaQ9/RCsUeVBkByUVs/4ScsKJvg 5UrlVYy77suU0/I0HB1juQZxfgCgciWdpBH+93wttXUx+ZOgTYglJEBTcDr12gLTK2tc Ga/w==
X-Received: by 10.68.4.197 with SMTP id m5mr596321pbm.46.1378260799628; Tue, 03 Sep 2013 19:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: twatteyne@gmail.com
Received: by 10.66.147.193 with HTTP; Tue, 3 Sep 2013 19:12:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAzoce6x7hNZX+GV1xcf9nyDZok2h57SjFh_AjbJXvzM=sUuzQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD841433684@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <CAAzoce6x7hNZX+GV1xcf9nyDZok2h57SjFh_AjbJXvzM=sUuzQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 19:12:59 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: inmMNDvQWJPx6dCWvozHryDm5H4
Message-ID: <CADJ9OA-7=b2zycBcGrjOeUVzuH23ADx6Yt5a6gyPtvB7ULzYKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "6tsch@ietf.org" <6tsch@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="bcaec52154e15eb00604e5855901"
Subject: Re: [6tsch] About the special type of event to ask PCE to create a track
X-BeenThere: 6tsch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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" <6tsch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6tsch>
List-Post: <mailto:6tsch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 02:13:22 -0000

Qin,

Thanks for bringing that up. Allow me to answer in Pascal's place. We are
talking about the format of the packets exchanged between the ME and the
nodes. In the centralized case, these are application-level packets, i.e.
packet generated by an entity a couple of layer above 6top. That entity
talks with the PCE over the network, and with 6top through the API
(internal to the node) as defined in
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-6tsch-6top-00#section-2.4.

If we agree on that, the question is whether the packet the node sends to
establish a new track is part of the event flow, or not. In both cases, it
would originate from this application-level entity, but possibly
transported in different ways.

Thomas

On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> wrote:

> Hi Pascal,
>
> My understanding is that 6top is a passive role in dealing with cell/track
> reservation. In another word, the 6top in a node can report its state,
> including neighbor table, cell usage, and other statistics information, but
> can not make decision on if some cells/track should be added or removed,
> which should be the responsibility of PCE in centralized case or upper
> layer in distributed case. Thus, I can not see when the 5th flow will be
> used. Can you explain more?
>
> Thanks
> Qin
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
> pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> We discussed at the call that the(PCEP?) request to ask for a track
>> establishment could be seen as an event, or could be a new flow.
>> At the call, I suggested that it could be a new, 5th flow. My arguments
>> are that this flow:
>> - Probably yields different data format. The demand carries and points,
>> end to end latency and bandwidth. That's quite specific.
>> - Probably yields a different flow. Events do not necessarily have a
>> response.
>> - Probably uses a different transport as well (PCEP vs. CoAP)
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Pascal
>> _______________________________________________
>> 6tsch mailing list
>> 6tsch@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6tsch mailing list
> 6tsch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch

 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch>