Re: [manet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-01.txt

Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Wed, 08 November 2017 13:46 UTC

Return-Path: <lberger@labn.net>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD0CB126CD6 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 05:46:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (768-bit key) header.d=labn.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 0iegBsdxaAf3 for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 05:46:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com (gproxy7-pub.mail.unifiedlayer.com [70.40.196.235]) (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 56A3D126CD8 for <manet@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 05:46:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmgw4 (unknown [10.0.90.85]) by gproxy7.mail.unifiedlayer.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CF82180A6 for <manet@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Nov 2017 06:36:46 -0700 (MST)
Received: from box313.bluehost.com ([69.89.31.113]) by cmgw4 with id XRcj1w00U2SSUrH01Rcm0A; Wed, 08 Nov 2017 06:36:46 -0700
X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.2 cv=JNNLi4Cb c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:117 a=h1BC+oY+fLhyFmnTBx92Jg==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=xqWC_Br6kY4A:10 a=sC3jslCIGhcA:10 a=wU2YTnxGAAAA:8 a=48vgC7mUAAAA:8 a=8QPJlpQicYKsawpDBTAA:9 a=B6ycOoBZGRRQ_fgS:21 a=b29XjGPe5-Wcv5Hc:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=Yz9wTY_ffGCQnEDHKrcv:22 a=w1C3t2QeGrPiZgrLijVG:22
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=labn.net; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=+0sks+9fJfkuMbGP682nHywRp7E3vLe7aHRHWgLYYH4=; b=UZ4X68turVTljeOh7tMKHujbE5 qgNOhPuy5+XQxe7LbXTC9I7ZZUmMhuSilALOHRMYcs2Ei1IDJTqUYcv5Zv31iP5vLO4wlWPAYzPIn ns5ElG2krsGR5Zn9FkDrHtPgL;
Received: from pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([100.15.86.101]:44690 helo=[IPv6:::1]) by box313.bluehost.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <lberger@labn.net>) id 1eCQX5-000gMd-5X; Wed, 08 Nov 2017 06:36:43 -0700
To: Henning Rogge <hrogge@gmail.com>
Cc: MANET IETF <manet@ietf.org>
References: <150938685312.7857.13103373643734474458@ietfa.amsl.com> <6514a53d-3731-2551-93fb-2599c4800b19@labn.net> <CAGnRvupMC0fXjFocncytobQ30ez9Ez_4SmiU7nNisOTQrAEe5g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Message-ID: <4ed91054-2eff-e73b-3c6a-3430b949f183@labn.net>
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2017 08:36:38 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAGnRvupMC0fXjFocncytobQ30ez9Ez_4SmiU7nNisOTQrAEe5g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - box313.bluehost.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - labn.net
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 100.15.86.101
X-Exim-ID: 1eCQX5-000gMd-5X
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: pool-100-15-86-101.washdc.fios.verizon.net ([IPv6:::1]) [100.15.86.101]:44690
X-Source-Auth: lberger@labn.net
X-Email-Count: 4
X-Source-Cap: bGFibm1vYmk7bGFibm1vYmk7Ym94MzEzLmJsdWVob3N0LmNvbQ==
X-Local-Domain: yes
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/desXfMNoH-LSVlx4ePmC_ZddU1Q>
Subject: Re: [manet] I-D Action: draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-01.txt
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2017 13:46:27 -0000

Henning,

Thank you for the comments! see below for in-line response.

On 11/8/2017 2:21 AM, Henning Rogge wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First, why do you need the "reserved" bytes at the end of the TLVs...
> DLEP already contains TLVs with a length not dividable by 4.
I'm fine with byte alignment, but alos thought it would be nice to leave
room for more flags definition without requiring a new data item.  Bits
are cheap in the control plane.  That said, I'm okay with
reducing/eliminating them if that's WG consensus.

> I am a bit concerned about the "hop control" data item, it packs A LOT
> more complexity than the "hop count" one.
Agreed.  Note that the modem controls if a router can do any control via
the Hop Count Data Item P bit.

> I also wonder if "hop control" should be part of a "request link
> characteristic" message.
>
> Thoughts about it?
I'm very interested in such a message, but also like small and focused
function increments from both standards and implementation
perspectives.  My inclination is to move forward with this one and start
thinking and working on the details of such a request message/DI.  What
do you think?

Lou

> Henning Rogge
>
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 7:11 PM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This version included updated references and some minor editorial fixes.
>>
>> Lou (for authors)
>>
>> On 10/30/2017 2:07 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>> This draft is a work item of the Mobile Ad-hoc Networks WG of the IETF.
>>>
>>>         Title           : DLEP Multi-Hop Forwarding Extension
>>>         Authors         : Bow-Nan Cheng
>>>                           Lou Berger
>>>       Filename        : draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-01.txt
>>>       Pages           : 9
>>>       Date            : 2017-10-30
>>>
>>> Abstract:
>>>    This document defines an extension to the DLEP protocol that enables
>>>    the reporting and control of Multi-Hop Forwarding by DLEP capable
>>>    modems.
>>>
>>>
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension/
>>>
>>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-01
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-01
>>>
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-manet-dlep-multi-hop-extension-01
>>>
>>>
>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
>>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>>
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> manet mailing list
>>> manet@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> manet mailing list
>> manet@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet