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

Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> Fri, 30 August 2013 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
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 2DD0321F9D45 for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:01:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.603
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.603 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.227, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_34=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 xzk3H1mRqgQy for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f41.google.com (mail-vb0-f41.google.com [209.85.212.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B889D21F9D70 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id g17so1525464vbg.14 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=eSr/Ntu9A4K7YAZoPYouoPoBOgxraDZykVux0NW3YVI=; b=LgDNw78s7eJkHQBjc9IrJlCOp9JMR1hTH2Ftmfm48hjrCRmm6tZwhlEYNsMPdgwF4x 4/uIwp1cYCbVRcqXsLrmgZDYd5eAxMKC4rdHDDlD+X17bQhCz/o5BAEKRZWyeNZqiu2S 2LL9jUk3Qtl4ZwESvfrSbx6NrQ0p79pwBOYNfvQ4Z2BVJqusjKrg/WitoBNwi74crvQm XajA302e/RecnoYWpJT1B+NOYh37Fn5bouUuL1Ja4vZ9ybOk6M85ncjrBNaQ6rxCR+bC Fw/pJX3Hzw1zb4bfxgsGCrfrzyzzfHsvwyVYg2/Zw5jV3suXOUV+0LfBEfUNnJljxFUh nNzw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl8THYRTiU+wNBIrzZ7kHsdHsShAcljDyZL/2MVXh05inuvNMYJ+AISVjWpqBjp7BxNGheQ
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.58.230.135 with SMTP id sy7mr1078vec.42.1377885691186; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.116.135 with HTTP; Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD841433684@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD841433684@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 02:01:31 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAzoce6x7hNZX+GV1xcf9nyDZok2h57SjFh_AjbJXvzM=sUuzQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bdc87be2a1cd204e52e0336"
Cc: "6tsch@ietf.org" <6tsch@ietf.org>
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: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 18:01:36 -0000

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
>