Re: [Efficientnd-dt] ND related test results draft

Erik Nordmark <nordmark@sonic.net> Thu, 12 March 2015 21:22 UTC

Return-Path: <nordmark@sonic.net>
X-Original-To: efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89F291A9174 for <efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.01
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_75=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 rgHaDtV87EgT for <efficientnd-dt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from c.mail.sonic.net (c.mail.sonic.net [64.142.111.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CD21A9172 for <efficientnd-dt@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.22.239.87] ([162.210.130.3]) (authenticated bits=0) by c.mail.sonic.net (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id t2CLLmoB032662 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:21:48 -0700
Message-ID: <5502036C.2000105@sonic.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:21:48 -0700
From: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@sonic.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Samita Chakrabarti <samita.chakrabarti@ericsson.com>, "Erik Nordmark (nordmark@acm.org)" <nordmark@acm.org>
References: <ECA43DA70480A3498E43C3471FB2E1F01C2E84C1@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <ECA43DA70480A3498E43C3471FB2E1F01C2E84C1@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Sonic-CAuth: UmFuZG9tSVY8X2uznJvFeSJyc34/QZEkr67vqSDZWKxjT+m0oIQvcJzprVp4g1TN+2J+0eUV0e2FiaDxYHVogicH+4LNLPXf
X-Sonic-ID: C;5EIVy/3I5BGygO8Jj30JFw== M;MH8yy/3I5BGygO8Jj30JFw==
X-Sonic-Spam-Details: 0.0/5.0 by cerberusd
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/efficientnd-dt/cP9gkjyzMFb3JQLtyc45slr8UXE>
Cc: "asood2@ncsu.edu" <asood2@ncsu.edu>, "efficientnd-dt@ietf.org" <efficientnd-dt@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Efficientnd-dt] ND related test results draft
X-BeenThere: efficientnd-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: 6man Efficient ND Design Team discussion list <efficientnd-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/efficientnd-dt>, <mailto:efficientnd-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/efficientnd-dt/>
List-Post: <mailto:efficientnd-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:efficientnd-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/efficientnd-dt>, <mailto:efficientnd-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 21:22:00 -0000

On 3/9/15 4:18 PM, Samita Chakrabarti wrote:
>
> Hello Erik and all:
>
> A draft has been published by Ankur Sood (from North Carolina State 
> University); Ankur had done some simple tests with ND routers(linux 
> Ubuntu), a  non-intelligent Wifi access point which sends data back 
> and forth towards and from the wireless hosts ( two wifi phone devices 
> and a laptop ).
>
> The purpose of this draft is to see how RA messages can increase with 
> the frequency of interval and the difference between min and MAX 
> advinterval. Also how different sleeping host implementations behave 
> differently  around ND and DAD.
>
The part about the different behavior of of the hosts is quite 
informative. I think this is an area we should understand better to see 
how the implementation choices affect the network behavior.

Changing maxRa and not minRa seems less useful than changing one and 
keeping the max:min ratio constant. One would expect that with a 
constant ratio between them the RA rate would be proportional to the 
timers. However, I can't easily check if that is the case from the 
results due to the change in ratio. (And if there are additional hosts 
one would expect to see RAs caused by sending RS as they connect; many 
router implementations multicast those solicited RAs.)

I didn't quite understand the last part about changing the lifetime. 
That should not affect when RAs are transmitted (which the results show).

Thanks,
    Erik

> Perhaps it could provide some data point for DAD issues as well.  I 
> have CC’ed Ankur if anyone has any questions/suggestions for him.
>
> -Samita
>
> >Name: draft-sood-6man-nd-signalling-n-dad-test
> > Revision:       00
> > Title:          Test result analysis of IPv6 Neighbor Discovery in a
> > simple Wireless network
> > Document date:  2015-03-09
> > Group:          Individual Submission
> > Pages:          14
> > URL:
> > 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-sood-6man-nd-signalling-n-dad-test-00.txt
> > Status:
> > 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sood-6man-nd-signalling-n-dad-test/
> > Htmlized:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-sood-6man-nd-signalling-n-dad-test-00
> >
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    IPv6 WG is looking into various Neighbor Discovery (ND) optimization
> >    techniques.  This document describes several test cases and test
> >    results on IPv6 ND number of messages, power usages using simple WiFi
> >    configuration and wireless phones as hosts.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Efficientnd-dt mailing list
> Efficientnd-dt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/efficientnd-dt