Re: [Roll] [6tisch] Support of flow label to carry the RPL information in data packets

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <> Thu, 17 April 2014 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F72B1A0298; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 10:08:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.773
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.773 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sNvbzTbint2q; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 10:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F6CD1A0292; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 10:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2948; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1397754484; x=1398964084; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=s0Ju5AtxnBeyzfcFeZXR+y8EUz1edKRQp+Tonyti9gQ=; b=HGeO+zQvgbho7nCHwbFdGtz3UyNITlJoKc7uGdZhsX7n7fEUXU2EfYSu Q0Qpg71te9491kWBHoItDJcC0AhGrralXfzKxqZWoPs0taRRUH9Hdcffa 41YwzOZ/IJuUDs8iShu7BwiLxPEeYEalhFGkqzZ/l4Ga7nH9T6r1H0VrF A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,880,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="36677912"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 17 Apr 2014 17:08:03 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s3HH83S5031900 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:08:03 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 17 Apr 2014 12:08:03 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <>
To: Fernando Gont <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [6tisch] [Roll] Support of flow label to carry the RPL information in data packets
Thread-Index: AQHPWkxLZufVJd4IcEWCVYj/JQlplpsWB1zg
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:08:02 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:08:00 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>, Ines Robles <>, roll <>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [6tisch] Support of flow label to carry the RPL information in data packets
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:08:12 -0000

Hello Fernando

Thanks for your review, and we can certainly use some piece of advice from you here:

1) Yes, the idea is that leaves of a RPL network do not use the flow label. Inside the RPL domain it is used to support RPL operations. 
At the border router, which is a RPL root, it is finally set to the value that is visible in the Internet. I can expect some knee jerk about this proposal but before rejecting in on some principle we must consider the benefits in IoT applications, and whether the interests that the flow label serves in the core can still be enabled with this proposal.

2) The draft did not finalize the way the Flow Label is computed in the Internet side. If we agree on the principle then we can work out the details.

To give you an idea, my mind is to compute classically a hash for a given flow.

The root is expected to have a policy that indicates whether the original source address is relevant or not in the identification of a flow (it is not for a compound flow that we do not want to see separated in the Internet). The instance ID that is in the original flow label is certainly relevant and is used in the hash computation. A random computed by the root at boot would be useful as well.

We expect few flows to emerge from a given RPL root, and even fewer from a given constrained device.
The random and the hash are really there to enable load balancing between flows out of different backbone routers.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fernando Gont []
> Sent: jeudi 17 avril 2014 16:49
> To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert);
> Cc:; Ines Robles; roll
> Subject: Re: [6tisch] [Roll] Support of flow label to carry the RPL information
> in data packets
> Hi, Pascal,
> On 04/17/2014 11:27 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
> >
> > Considering the support we have at 6TiSCH and ROLL for the work, I
> > published draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-00.txt to the 6MAN WG.
> >
> > The main discussion is probably to confirm whether our proposed use of
> > the flow label inside the RPL domain is compatible with the goals that
> > are achieved by RFC6437. Let us continue the discussion there from now
> on.
> I just skimmed through the I-D. Two quick questions:
> 1) Does your document propose/require that the Flow Label be rewritten by
> some border router? -- I ask because, at the time, there was strong
> opposition to this.
> 2) Does the algorithm/scheme with which you'll rewrite the Flow-Label lead
> to predictable sequences? And/or, would the resulting values have a
> uniform distribution?
> Thanks!
> Best regards,
> --
> Fernando Gont
> e-mail: || PGP Fingerprint:
> 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1