[core] Time Scale Option

Laurent Toutain <laurent.toutain@imt-atlantique.fr> Tue, 29 May 2018 09:02 UTC

Return-Path: <laurent.toutain@imt-atlantique.fr>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DCD1127863; Tue, 29 May 2018 02:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=imt-atlantique.fr
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9zgvEjHmPYvf; Tue, 29 May 2018 02:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zproxy110.enst.fr (zproxy110.enst.fr [137.194.2.192]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4294412711E; Tue, 29 May 2018 02:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by zproxy110.enst.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEE1080342; Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from zproxy110.enst.fr ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (zproxy110.enst.fr [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id JlTEsWDNZdra; Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by zproxy110.enst.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 491D7820AA; Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:33 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 zproxy110.enst.fr 491D7820AA
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=imt-atlantique.fr; s=50EA75E8-DE22-11E6-A6DE-0662BA474D24; t=1527584553; bh=7IPzhsYgPHxe6OGvBnR/lDnnCR3ZAjZw/jEYGEDYFno=; h=MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID:To; b=Js8WiT0ztkKLypty9xragGtvVwd+s96ficO9R4nA5UJjs/hViE/yZSnFDQc8uJjN5 xOlEKM9zKFpjgl8gkpcDmybxJmF1x8zfd8oKxOULv2IHjb8eOoOsalYhn4iKTM01pW /c+ePnr1P1ECVCO2gfSMfKvwGQRKPEyDaHNBBpHc=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zproxy110.enst.fr
Received: from zproxy110.enst.fr ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (zproxy110.enst.fr [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 3u88QvgI-A0g; Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-it0-f43.google.com (mail-it0-f43.google.com [209.85.214.43]) by zproxy110.enst.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E5E48820C8; Tue, 29 May 2018 11:02:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-it0-f43.google.com with SMTP id 76-v6so2309477itx.4; Tue, 29 May 2018 02:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPweg/YGjaTCSND33UfzVjVQrp1JzmRUm1q0dtXYV2MEsrFgUNTSi p7dVpjv0m/Lo4Ma5D9aTp3sRBXHNiMwR0w7YS8w=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKKP1ByXEGJIorePghrRJVl+h4Qf8fmsePBaDTUDOVopnBKr64ZEkjtbMnaVtHNGM1uDeACl2O3xIjMrbuPIjzU=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:cfc4:: with SMTP id y187-v6mr14378231itf.26.1527584551480; Tue, 29 May 2018 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Laurent Toutain <laurent.toutain@imt-atlantique.fr>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 11:01:54 +0200
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CABONVQYBFKSeY0boxwUvskODA0YxUSu1qDPOkMXbrJRxoFiwOg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABONVQYBFKSeY0boxwUvskODA0YxUSu1qDPOkMXbrJRxoFiwOg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "core@ietf.org WG" <core@ietf.org>
Cc: lp-wan <lp-wan@ietf.org>, Ana Minaburo <ana@ackl.io>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008e35f4056d547e47"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/fBxs2rouUJzqjq-OHXoBvMIIewg>
Subject: [core] Time Scale Option
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 May 2018 09:02:38 -0000

Hi,



We have published few month ago a draft defining a new CoAP option.


https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-toutain-core-time-scale/


The main idea is to inform a server when devices will not have the same
reaction time. Current CoAP RFC defines a default 5 minutes window during
which any message will be consider as a retransmission.  This delay is too
small for LPWAN network, where small bandwidth, duty cycles are introducing
larger delays. One solution is to change the default window value, but this
period will be too long for “regular” devices and force the server to
memorize more message ID.



That’s why we propose the Time Scale option, the client informs the server
of the window period where messages will be considered as retransmitted.
The server will be informed for this device and will adapt its timers.



We would like to know, as we discussed during London IETF, what is the
position of the core wg on this option.



Ana and Laurent