IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6tsch] minutes webex 21 June 2013

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 24 June 2013 11:05 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.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 A6B3811E8128 for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 04:05:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 e594OO4DlJLu for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 04:05:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E212E11E8125 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 04:05:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1636; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1372071941; x=1373281541; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=RFZX+MAJ3q0KcK4ip4vA53WHAEeTjqqcbQijRM8sF4Y=; b=hi25L+D0fEoXksKjWsf5Vh5dPJKMcbWC0wqvqW5HrUjY49oO2CAk+Jau 1Stuo3wni65qkn1J9iGsnrvxw4u/ZVCnHHPVMGPkByz/p0nXTntvXTnUH kEtv+QVsiGgj7J0T9qiiuOcpo9UkoOabe8DoGyoi9rMwnkeaYvxsIcQJM 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiAFAM4myFGtJXG//2dsb2JhbABbDgiCczFJvzZ9FnSCIwEBAQQBAQE3NAsMBAIBCA4DAQMBAQsUCQcnCxQDBggCBAENBQgBiAUMuRWOHYEBMQIFBoJ8YQOYbIp6hSGCUj6BcTc
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,928,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="226398910"
Received: from rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com ([173.37.113.191]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 24 Jun 2013 11:05:40 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com [173.36.12.78]) by rcdn-core2-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r5OB5eta015400 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:05:40 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([169.254.1.80]) by xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com ([173.36.12.78]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 24 Jun 2013 06:05:40 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Philip Levis <pal@cs.stanford.edu>, Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Thread-Topic: [6tsch] minutes webex 21 June 2013
Thread-Index: AQHObqoUVFs1EFBV00eqeZaLIqRlS5lA2RkAgAPdZtA=
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:05:38 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:05:00 +0000
Message-ID: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD84132CFF7@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <CADJ9OA9VYixpZ3qCoW5Rdd+Heoai8R_SmND53NqyZ0FWUz1hpw@mail.gmail.com> <763D0548-7E5F-41CC-A528-2A0CA85F4909@cs.stanford.edu>
In-Reply-To: <763D0548-7E5F-41CC-A528-2A0CA85F4909@cs.stanford.edu>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.49.80.43]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: 6TSCH <6tsch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6tsch] minutes webex 21 June 2013
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: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:05:45 -0000

Hello Phil:

After the positive review by Brian http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg06967.html I'll be quite happy to go back to 6MAN.
I attended the meetings where the flow label story was debated and what they really cared for was load balancing at the core. 
What happens in the fringe was below the radar. We need to express clearly what we want and I trust 6MAN will be helpful.

Cheers,

Pascal

-----Original Message-----
From: 6tsch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:6tsch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Philip Levis
Sent: vendredi 21 juin 2013 20:58
To: Thomas Watteyne
Cc: 6TSCH
Subject: Re: [6tsch] minutes webex 21 June 2013

On Jun 21, 2013, at 11:06 AM, Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> 	* [08.07] draft-thubert-architecture [Pascal]
> 		* ROLL flow label draft 
> (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thubert-roll-flow-label) using the 
> flow label we can skip to have another encapsulation and use it for 
> the hop-by-hop

There was a lot of discussion about using the flow label with the ROLL WG.  I raised the concern that it's in violation of RFC6437. This seems like a very bad idea. Pascal, I think we all agree that being able to use the flow label would be very valuable, but the hurdle of using it is to convince 6man to amend RFC6437.

Phil

-------
Philip Levis
Associate Professor
Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Stanford University http://csl.stanford.edu/~pal


_______________________________________________
6tsch mailing list
6tsch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status