Re: [6tsch] set DAGRank to Join Priority

Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> Fri, 27 September 2013 21:20 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 B7CF811E80DE for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:20:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.662
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.662 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.314, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 Ez+VBIr7oZ2o for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com (mail-ie0-f178.google.com [209.85.223.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBF521F9F88 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:20:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id to1so5345982ieb.9 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:20:19 -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=9cTDtzKYYpPVBzqlYviZ+sfUAXOwS9tji6N19Hhh6j0=; b=G+W6XuJWsxIeVMi6Lpq1pJUsqB4YWEUP92iqBTL3VI1XnvKhNiOE4jKjfj+O0aCpMN C9yxobG8x/IZ8Ywbr7nxb37aEuN/LTt1lljB5y+HCQDgk91y6glxY/pVQSagQfR5I8z7 aDMG+XHF2jtcH0n+1Qvy9xltolEXClLBIJpL0WTPPHNe7QV8rUQAc2hdkMlBoXP5PpGA gIPk8K1iR+5+mZOm7IeoyVKNTF5CrFysbSlvt1q/A9tV9smu5/lmF0KB2qT7h8t1Jou4 P0MJq8/0wX2o+9UQIIWXx3eh4CxlKo0bkiEP0xjH5spUNfBGLUkMX9sKM8yinbxh+2kb IkZQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnvEJYeUsnTAHsoVkAdybW6Nj9Frp95Pfk3jf7wqpSkvx/09CqrG3ViX7A/8mVgZ4WZx28g
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.86.73 with SMTP id t9mr47749icl.81.1380316818294; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.130.234 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:20:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CALEMV4Zbc8xy=yQzE7K=RChEWBdC80ommMwqhRxYwfZNt6XypA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAzoce5GiY8zsD4aSaSeWB19Se3fwcTTd8wpqRTC0rAonncUkg@mail.gmail.com> <CALEMV4Zom6wW6ByhB3zMwJRt1NpqmeFbe13NuUbrFSWz=pNGhw@mail.gmail.com> <CAAzoce4zvg0_igrE=U-afgf1iOsGmSUo78kjL-z7tmLVnWRBwg@mail.gmail.com> <CALEMV4Zbc8xy=yQzE7K=RChEWBdC80ommMwqhRxYwfZNt6XypA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 05:20:18 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAzoce5sWeo6+58jjX6Jax_c=JWiBMEFZR=qJA-oX9MWmqjKSQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
To: Xavier Vilajosana Guillen <xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba613d88a1ed1704e7640d4b
Cc: "6tsch@ietf.org" <6tsch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6tsch] set DAGRank to Join Priority
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, 27 Sep 2013 21:20:30 -0000

Xavi,

You mean:
if rank <= 0x3f then JoinPriority=rank else JoinPriority=0x3f

Correct? I think it could be a solution.

Thanks
Qin


On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Xavier Vilajosana Guillen <
xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote:

> Hi Qin,
>
> my suggestion is to use JoinPriority[5:0] = (rank[15:8]&0x3F) or 0x3F if
> bigger -- having a 0x3F would be like having INFINITE Join Priority as in
> the case of RPL with ranks>65535.
>
> would that not work?
> X
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>> Xavi,
>>
>> Let's take the example in your draft to see what the problem is. Please
>> point out if I'm wrong.
>> +-------+
>>      |   0   | R(0)=0
>>      |       | DAGRank(R(0)) = 0
>>      +-------+
>>          |
>>          |
>>      +-------+
>>      |   1   | R(1)=R(0)+683=683
>>      |       | DAGRank(R(1)) = 2
>>      +-------+
>>          |
>>          |
>>      +-------+
>>      |   2   | R(2)=R(1)+683=1366
>>      |       | DAGRank(R(2)) = 5
>>      +-------+
>>          |
>>          |
>>      +-------+
>>      |   3   | R(3)=R(2)+683=2049
>>      |       | DAGRank(R(3)) = 8
>>      +-------+
>>          |
>>          |
>>      +-------+
>>      |   4   | R(4)=R(3)+683=2732
>>      |       | DAGRank(R(4)) = 10
>>      +-------+
>>          |
>>          |
>>      +-------+
>>      |   5   | R(5)=R(4)+683=3415
>>      |       | DAGRank(R(5)) = 13
>>      +-------+
>>
>> From the example, you can see R(n) is a 2-byte integer, and DAGRank is
>> always the higher byte of the 2byte integer, because minHopRankIncrease =
>> 256.
>>
>> If set JoinPriority = DAGRank, then it is possible JoinPriority> 0x3f
>> (although it unlikely happens often), out of its range.
>> If set JoinPriority[5:0] = DAGRank[7:2], (Is it your suggestion?), a new
>> node may found many existing nodes with same JoinPriority in received EB.
>> In another word, the JoinPriority can not provide information about
>> preferring joining. Right?
>>
>> I haven't had good solution for it. So, I hope the range 0x00~0x3f is not
>> a "MUST" in IEEE802.15.4e.
>>
>> What  do you think?
>> Qin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 2:30 AM, Xavier Vilajosana Guillen <
>> xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Qin,
>>>
>>> after thinking a little bit on that maybe we can use the higher byte of
>>> the rank for that. that is  rank>>8, the higher byte is a monotonically
>>> increasing counter. As each hop is <<8 (due to minhopRankIncrease) we can
>>> have the sense of higher join priority as higher the rank.
>>>
>>> In addition having if we have the limitation of 0x3F, this means that we
>>> will support Join priorities up to 0x3F that translated to ranks are
>>> 0x3F<<8 (big number) ..
>>>
>>> just thoughts...
>>> X
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 10:30 AM, Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>
>>>> I think with OF0 the DAGRank is uint8. But, in the Table 52b of
>>>> IEEE802.15.4e, the range of Join Priority is 0x00~0x3f. If the range is a
>>>> "MUST", we have to have a function mapping a DAGRank in 0x00~0xff to a
>>>> JoinPriority in 0x00~0x3f. Correct?
>>>>
>>>> Would you please confirm with some expertise in IEEE802.15.4e if the
>>>> range 0x00~0x3f is a MUST or not?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Qin
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 6tsch mailing list
>>>> 6tsch@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>