Re: [Last-Call] Iotdir telechat review of draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 15 April 2021 18:57 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 320A83A2AF8; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:57:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 uG7ZYxMAgLbP; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ej1-x633.google.com (mail-ej1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::633]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30EE03A2AF4; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ej1-x633.google.com with SMTP id sd23so29782615ejb.12; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fuyVvCgQD9orvMJnsU77s1mwzeJKy75chysHx2V1LPo=; b=tfSkpzHb0122BL3Y+KwD8ek448xHlw1LZYMr7/MpD7F6iRRWzporjR7JBWS4IniDaF X1EQAv4ZY/7rFxFUJDZ/RaA1WMF4VmIGkmfNxgMQSn4ula2hF5q510GhhFN4zZnMga41 OjR9jwy2f3tEf62HT3ADdmkoRRKZjPTaIyhHCIN67OtGAiHG8FL58BRBUR9voiLUhDCx h3oSENiCYmjOv6ClZm4rVMNFktOdK2Wa7PytMGpwGHhnX0A55zMxm4wT8nJ8UJ2OvkDP Up3ZmoVk3wIk5qih7Vnbs9hG3bkVFcklT6FnSuOZutFcNWZX/2B0B2dEKoDi/jYW8nzn 8FWQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fuyVvCgQD9orvMJnsU77s1mwzeJKy75chysHx2V1LPo=; b=TE5QKSEwI+v6a7KDYKpuiTsuyOs1eHYjHlvfXZx5p9rPa03076VsHzr5qA5CIkqVyt KfPNevt7X1pI14ZmXJZQZQaaxhqPajd1MPnI6bxyR6JrpewtkJgYjMar9CaWOuQ+AMS7 sNCvlynmF63wyYLvGaRYgZwkjXwR32INjxa3bbfrw1rg0aWZEo4HmLHoQs4OF75EUH7t 8HvOIl/J58fzuccNj5LmNHAAVHL93iXi7gWQvl55kvhtN8xk38cqnPGn02PJcsWetHGJ QDadPNetUHyUl7ElAOQKLqkpNzRux/7CNSpu0Fh3fJ/xUhXSWEhBRWsnErepwe0bk3oK OVbw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530w+Wub8st0WYQKqtIKxbdyhJ3mj0hMuFsQOHu7aQ5f6ILWbpkt WenX7lUQebASSZsiRuySVGz3oY+i7HmxkUjGyVI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxr4KLEk9mIQ5oaMnqCgq4QNYmxjSCcg6eZqMBY47+nhhjAAI/ENWzPZVIgoQ9h7+ZLfaLkifZHIDWYk3HLIrw=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:134d:: with SMTP id x13mr4971088ejb.61.1618513041823; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:57:21 +0000
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <161848055597.18527.2186863564067252978@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <161848055597.18527.2186863564067252978@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:57:21 +0000
Message-ID: <CAMMESswJuhtD7=QZSd-9a=T=kDovL4to-XMtu2QN7tDXjJ0foA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Van der Stok <consultancy@vanderstok.org>
Cc: last-call@ietf.org, draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl.all@ietf.org, iot-directorate@ietf.org, roll@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/2pWuZTKrc2eVtH-cz0_8-BOz7eQ>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Iotdir telechat review of draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 18:57:30 -0000

On April 15, 2021 at 5:55:57 AM, Peter Van der Stok wrote:


Peter:

Hi!  I hope you're doing well!


> In general, the document is well written. By looking regularly into RFC 6550,
> I am rather sure that I could implement the protocol. The question remains
> how this draft relates to RFC 6997. When the WG decides that this draft
> replaces RFC 6997, then it would be good to copy some text from 6997 to this
> draft, because RFC 6997 is more explicit about the use of RPL parameters as
> specified in RFC 6550 and presents more explicit motivation.

As you know, the roll WG considered the question of replacing rfc6997
as part of my AD review [1].  At the time there didn't seem to be any
strong interest in doing so.  Do you think that has changed?

Thanks for the review!

Alvaro.

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/r3MP2MKrWqTMVmAQjKJDfU6iu-A/