Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time-03

Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net> Sat, 16 February 2019 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EEE613104F; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:40:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=earthlink.net; domainkeys=pass (2048-bit key) header.from=charles.perkins@earthlink.net header.d=earthlink.net
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 PDCqufEIE4yx; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:39:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) (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 D43B713104E; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:39:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=earthlink.net; s=dk12062016; t=1550356798; bh=LhQC00hyL1UhPCBR2s+n8SkFBwpQuuZqzFTl DfqSUZs=; h=Received:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Message-ID:Date: User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Language:X-ELNK-Trace: X-Originating-IP; b=E9/NmiyBzsaF1otxLbhb9dO3TBzrYlWaS82c4OjC8ANARg HcwRT9VdRQxQfoX1YvJZ12TYf7NfMTXjY03BjyR569NB/NarwP2iqMZX6deulrM8TfL ZEKQZl/f9HV9DC1HOYi609XamYHz0D/hd8NR6RO7uj21GsDyXExs0tg4BWiUENNvzMj e+b2DV7tW09jYhPbfb39dwFNDwjBxZrME3dyOzDw41POej6rG9dze42aRcVbpwsku2/ /gbvtq2DO9v6xnGYOoaaeCW2Ddd3OU9/c5HScZKfVoK/igEjSHcdQNiD9PMhm1CHuXh c/Ebrk2YZj3XtrWvq6X7hAVO2KFQ==
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk12062016; d=earthlink.net; b=CQ1GNOuHeUhqy8r7v1N5HuKoPXhcgjtSmoLN6JGcjPzb5IRMzAgoFqLthgPbUyvfvdXwUnuASSdneGie7/ZSUtJoLGiBSHTgo+7z0KFO8sSlMMaeT11Pv5nZMczCzb+pyANcKjk1kkjE4x5GG2sxESx2tFeEGLJcpAeOfQEXml5b+s7lXpMnf/dDwrWFgY8+PAvoDIPBNLeT/UBLUbqVMwph32EOL9jNPcMYrqOEH/oJPQw7ZFrU7YlqhkrYmsuAh6e0d99WTH6pk2n29fblvPlNhUK8qubOgaf0qE/9sqNDW1BsE0MRvjMBIrpVTTCauOXJwUS+DUny9smZalnp0w==; h=Received:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Message-ID:Date:User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Language:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [99.51.72.196] (helo=[192.168.1.82]) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4) (envelope-from <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>) id 1gv8cn-0002pT-KG; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 17:39:57 -0500
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time.all@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org, 6lo@ietf.org
References: <87zhqxojys.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
From: Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <dcfc1e09-7ecd-b9a4-1c91-d8031aebe4b5@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:39:55 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87zhqxojys.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-ELNK-Trace: 137d7d78656ed6919973fd6a8f21c4f2d780f4a490ca6956846b590522b13c95696a4a61d176f13ee3dc33a6d5c3a628350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 99.51.72.196
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/WSlq1NgEUz30S2w8D7CmT9SC5UQ>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time-03
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2019 22:40:00 -0000

Hello Dale,

I made some brief follow-up to your comments inline below.  I think we 
are in agreement about what needs to be done.

On 2/14/2019 6:37 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@earthlink.net>; writes:
>> I'm not sure about this because even in 6TiSCH networks, one could
>> imagine using NTP-based time representations.  Besides that, we'd really
>> like to avoid restricting the use of the Deadline-6LoRHE to only 6TiSCH.
> I agree that one could imagine any number of schemes, and in the long
> run, broad use of Deadline-6LoRHE is desirable.  But that doesn't change
> the fact that while the draft purports to define the meaning of three
> values of the TU field, for two of those values, the draft doesn't
> specify what zero-point is being used for the time scale, and so
> implementations using those values cannot ensure interoperation.
>
> Now if what you really mean is "NTP time scale in microseconds" and "NTP
> time scale in seconds", those *are* definitions.  But that's not what the
> draft says.


We have revamped the way of representing the deadline time and optional 
origination time, and I think it will resolve your comments here.  In a 
nutshell, we are following the recommendations in 
draft-ietf-ntp-packet-timestamps.


> ...
>> We will rework the time representation and show a proposed new format
>> soon.  I agree that, if both values are present, one should be a delta
>> from the other.
> The way you write that suggests that either or both of the times can be
> present.  But the deadline time is not optional.  So if the origination
> time is present, both times are present.


Agreed, and the new revision will make this clear as well.

Regards,
Charlie P.