IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] call for consensus for the RPL RPI / RH3 compression

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Sat, 20 December 2014 14:38 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9B1C1A90B4; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:38:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 gPvGN_nw16LU; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:38:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AAE41A8AFE; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 06:38:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1199; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1419086321; x=1420295921; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Ud+KgZ8+Saz365olM23VjeQvER7fPbOHU/DdkbTms5Q=; b=ktOEqOirUIJMAsCNHH5wzyCrnpaDZlmSrYsX9bMXAenEixm/ykLApxd8 /KPa6NFvZZk9hnOz2SzyAipwf+ukWxJshEb4+mwqFBlPVXMRIofY1669x oWZ1yzdvSkfgWFAXa8EPLBukVHypUNiPvoJE5P/MuKM6UR9QAWcuMb8cI Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AmAFAKKIlVStJA2K/2dsb2JhbABbgwaBKsQJhweBDgKBERYBAQEBAX2EDAEBAQMBHVwFCwIBCA4KLjIlAgQOBYgkCNAuAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARmPPzMHgxaBEwEEjg+IcpFKIoNub4JDAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,613,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="381575156"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 20 Dec 2014 14:38:40 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com [173.36.12.77]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sBKEcd87004603 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:38:39 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([169.254.1.21]) by xhc-aln-x03.cisco.com ([173.36.12.77]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Sat, 20 Dec 2014 08:38:39 -0600
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] call for consensus for the RPL RPI / RH3 compression
Thread-Index: AQHQG9a1OTT/hQZ1Sli00GcxCDRZVZyYjZsD
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:38:38 +0000
Message-ID: <669D8C1D-2FBF-4E42-9002-92D3C1550C73@cisco.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848AC2314@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <184B78CA-953E-45AB-B00C-B3A12CFE4605@tzi.org> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848AC7D04@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <54942758.6090705@innovationslab.net> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848AC86C5@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <549440F0.8040407@innovationslab.net>, <5C9D8B2D-8779-450A-B558-D35323BA18FE@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <5C9D8B2D-8779-450A-B558-D35323BA18FE@tzi.org>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/0flngsSm8VHnUkneFuK17V1aQ3w
Cc: "6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <6man-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "int-ads@tools.ietf.org" <int-ads@tools.ietf.org>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, "6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] call for consensus for the RPL RPI / RH3 compression
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2014 14:38:42 -0000

Same here,

The only case for which implementation would teach us something is the efficient NHC proposal; but considering that we now have the routing header proposal I doubt that any NHC will ever be implemented...

Cheers,

Pascal

> Le 19 déc. 2014 à 22:57, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> a écrit :
> 
>> On 19 Dec 2014, at 16:14, Brian Haberman <brian@innovationslab.net> wrote:
>> 
>> 1. There have been several proposals put forth
>> 
>> 2. Issues have been raised on each one
>> 
>> So, it seems prudent (to me) to look at each of the alternatives and
>> determine which warts everyone concerned is willing to live with.
>> Running code is a good way to do that.
> 
> I agree with Xavi here: This is a good way to gather data for implementation issues (such as the implementation complexity of the “efficient” variant of the NHC approach).  It is not so good for architectural issues (flow label) or housekeeping issues (code point usage of the “greedy” variant; code point re-use in the revised MH proposal).  We should have an agreement on the latter ones before going into a plugfest.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email