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

Charlie Perkins <> Sat, 16 February 2019 22:40 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EEE613104F; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:40:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.002
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key); domainkeys=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PDCqufEIE4yx; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:39:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D43B713104E; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 14:39:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; 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;; 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 [] (helo=[]) by with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4) (envelope-from <>) id 1gv8cn-0002pT-KG; Sat, 16 Feb 2019 17:39:57 -0500
To: "Dale R. Worley" <>
References: <>
From: Charlie Perkins <>
Message-ID: <>
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: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-ELNK-Trace: 137d7d78656ed6919973fd6a8f21c4f2d780f4a490ca6956846b590522b13c95696a4a61d176f13ee3dc33a6d5c3a628350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-6lo-deadline-time-03
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-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 <> 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 

> ...
>> 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.

Charlie P.