Re: [6tsch] set DAGRank to Join Priority

Xavier Vilajosana Guillen <xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu> Fri, 27 September 2013 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <xvilajosana@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 A58C121F9EAF for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.926
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.926 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=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 h-3-FSbWXNfv for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-f176.google.com (mail-pd0-f176.google.com [209.85.192.176]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65D4921F9E91 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pd0-f176.google.com with SMTP id q10so3089536pdj.21 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:04 -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:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=HqmmzCaBXSnS/Swri5gWuRAV4HZpl3GqTEm5ReZY4Ng=; b=iGdNuzntapHUgRiKqkEhz8ZgBpDz0iuzO3+23oz0A0WP/0Vv4kuX7RT/X1EoWHEbq8 c6RmeylTOIWp9QtGt95gmd0JuLSLCeth77CKOeZc3H8jTskBu2yT5/ko34QzMYhaO8qD 8jqQDdUn3hp5u19tAezB4+9YzAc8BOpjA1PaePntaOm0oAx7wiZ1vdzv0z4KoZ+XZFAI 2C85DPheWm386IprezFG+H9hVI19tsQ9A8mYU7L+RX90vslru13oKiMSdcPugdx6mTGM 5J9Vado/upsWo/o+vo/3hxnLyX0zRiu1GXw62HoYO7J+bGt2cSJbXF26X7ibul1zexe6 B7nA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmuQayM+C9Pep/Jx0kvoeSObK/mytqq8PLUvy0ETfhN3SXr3RoV4DuYwKyc7uf+GdCotE9w
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.236.103 with SMTP id ut7mr9719911pbc.118.1380316024826; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.34.44 with HTTP; Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAAzoce4zvg0_igrE=U-afgf1iOsGmSUo78kjL-z7tmLVnWRBwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAzoce5GiY8zsD4aSaSeWB19Se3fwcTTd8wpqRTC0rAonncUkg@mail.gmail.com> <CALEMV4Zom6wW6ByhB3zMwJRt1NpqmeFbe13NuUbrFSWz=pNGhw@mail.gmail.com> <CAAzoce4zvg0_igrE=U-afgf1iOsGmSUo78kjL-z7tmLVnWRBwg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2013 14:07:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CALEMV4Zbc8xy=yQzE7K=RChEWBdC80ommMwqhRxYwfZNt6XypA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Xavier Vilajosana Guillen <xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu>
To: Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33daa85678a004e763dea0
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
Reply-To: xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu
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 21:07:22 -0000

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
>>>
>>>
>>
>