IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Reducing the battery impact of ND

Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org> Thu, 30 January 2014 10:23 UTC

Return-Path: <otroan@employees.org>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE6781A0448 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:23:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=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 uV4gfLH39-pj for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:22:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 587741A042D for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:22:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Files: signature.asc : 496
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgcFAJkn6lKQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABZgwy+L4EFFnSCJQEBAQMBeQULC0ZXBogQCMtSF44aaAeDJIEUBJA+mgmDLjs
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.95,748,1384300800"; d="asc'?scan'208"; a="4412110"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2014 10:22:55 +0000
Received: from dhcp-lys02-vla252-10-147-116-99.cisco.com (dhcp-lys02-vla252-10-147-116-99.cisco.com [10.147.116.99]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s0UAMr7a029052 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:22:54 GMT
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_82C8F099-5514-49C1-8539-E97860891E4F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
Subject: Re: Reducing the battery impact of ND
From: Ole Troan <otroan@employees.org>
In-Reply-To: <52E9EF2D.9050402@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 11:22:53 +0100
Message-Id: <2CFF305E-DE44-4D57-82D3-241196D94610@employees.org>
References: <CAKD1Yr29S=O5L4DfhNoiVieWPkgBJ2veuOu6ig5rwgK4ELz7Xw@mail.gmail.com> <52D96663.6060005@sonic.net> <CAKD1Yr3pCQ15uFz36MvKG3Q_Vzt27ws0aG1=94377FFaJtWV7g@mail.gmail.com> <52DA0ABA.8030903@acm.org> <CAKD1Yr1zSfAOv8j9XgB_ph9uaUUNW0yrJhfjJTsSTYHNKYNx9A@mail.gmail.com> <52E03BB4.8040309@acm.org> <DCA1F00D-0775-4030-A3BF-700F01F98C35@employees.org> <52E0423A.5070906@acm.org> <01DC3532-C73A-4644-A323-04BE6231AADA@employees.org> <52E9EF2D.9050402@acm.org>
To: Erik Nordmark <nordmark@acm.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: 6man Chairs <6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, Andrew Yourtchenko <ayourtch@gmail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:23:01 -0000

Erik,

> The frustrating thing is that the same folks that argue that the WG shouldn't work on a different design (targeting multicast challenged links), keep on suggesting tweaks. If the WG thinks we should work on improving ND for such links (and perhaps also improve it for battery operated hosts), then let's do that work. If not, then let's stop suggesting tweaks.

before designing anything new, I would like to see:
 - a clear description of the problem(s)
 - an analysis of how well we can do with existing protocols

does that sound fair?

cheers,
Ole

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email