IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dtn] Hop Count exceeding

Rick Taylor <rick@tropicalstormsoftware.com> Tue, 14 March 2017 10:13 UTC

Return-Path: <rick@tropicalstormsoftware.com>
X-Original-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C4AD1293F2 for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 03:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 ctOzK7hdk2AN for <dtn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 03:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tropicalstormsoftware.com (mail.tropicalstormsoftware.com [188.94.42.120]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 634641293DB for <dtn@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 03:13:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tss-server1.home.tropicalstormsoftware.com ([fe80::753b:fa82:5c0:af0d]) by tss-server1.home.tropicalstormsoftware.com ([fe80::753b:fa82:5c0:af0d%10]) with mapi; Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:12:44 +0000
From: Rick Taylor <rick@tropicalstormsoftware.com>
To: "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>, "scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov" <scott.c.burleigh@jpl.nasa.gov>, "lucas.kahlert@tu-dresden.de" <lucas.kahlert@tu-dresden.de>
Thread-Topic: [dtn] Hop Count exceeding
Thread-Index: AQHSm2MxqASID+jj9EWmSSnxMRgoL6GTWkIAgADGAAA=
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:12:42 +0000
Message-ID: <1489486362.3585.71.camel@tropicalstormsoftware.com>
References: <7a2caf75-9fcb-e50d-5e6b-f0cb9dbc61b8@tu-dresden.de> <A5BEAD028815CB40A32A5669CF737C3B8A3B5186@ap-embx-sp10.RES.AD.JPL>
In-Reply-To: <A5BEAD028815CB40A32A5669CF737C3B8A3B5186@ap-embx-sp10.RES.AD.JPL>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <ce6e186d-dc64-4f97-aa0b-8c2b34edaac5>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn/Xc9f3Dyziy1oCmu038NYnl5sUpA>
Subject: Re: [dtn] Hop Count exceeding
X-BeenThere: dtn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Delay Tolerant Networking \(DTN\) discussion list at the IETF." <dtn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dtn/>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn>, <mailto:dtn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 10:13:14 -0000

Scott,

I'm a fan of explicit status codes for these kinds of fundamental
things that routing protocols might want to use for their own purposes,
so "(9) Hop Limit Exceeded" gets a +1 from me.

Rick

On Mon, 2017-03-13 at 22:24 +0000, Burleigh, Scott C (312B) wrote:
> Hi, Lucas.  My answer would be that bundle deletion (5.14) is the
> correct method to invoke, because the disappearance of a bundle needs
> to be documented if that documentation was requested.  As to reason
> code, I guess it wouldn't be altogether misleading to use "(1)
> Lifetime expired" but, since the hop count mechanism was added after
> the status code reason list was developed, I don't see any reason why
> we couldn't add a new reason code like "(9) Hop limit exceeded".
> 
> Scott
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dtn [mailto:dtn-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lucas Kahlert
> Sent: Sunday, March 12, 2017 12:02 PM
> To: dtn <dtn@ietf.org>
> Subject: [dtn] Hop Count exceeding
> 
> Hello,
> 
> draft-ietf-dtn-bpbis-06 states in section 4.3.4 "a bundle SHOULD be
> deleted when its hop count exceeds its hop limit".
> My question is: which method should be invoked:
> 
>   - 5.14. Bundle Deletion or
>   - 5.15. Discarding a Bundle
> 
> And if a "Bundle Deletion" should be performed what is the
> appropriate reason code for a potential Bundle Status Report?
> 
> Maybe this point can be clarified in the document?
> 
> Regards,
> Lucas
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> dtn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> dtn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email