IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Roll] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-03

Joydeep Tripathi <joydeep.tripathi@gmail.com> Tue, 30 March 2010 07:45 UTC

Return-Path: <joydeep.tripathi@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767AC3A67D3 for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.39
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.39 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.74, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yDTvinbKcunM for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:45:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bw0-f217.google.com (mail-bw0-f217.google.com [209.85.218.217]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74DB3A67EF for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:45:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bwz9 with SMTP id 9so917628bwz.29 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fWSIbLhFJWvB4fZck3MehAAY4l7W1ivQ3Joh3CtuCIA=; b=RpmicM6GWTV1y/yn82Pa+qpzgIjd6UzmFEu5CFpj8aT/DnsHVsi7nLQOROOqLJlGxq NPHEO7u3j6LAaCRP2Ch7Omd5iyKaR4KnAe5ZWcwHBuhIbaib0i5UWQy337SQrOP6ZXBr 8nijKtVUmjnch3VKs+DzTvaS6+l8wDxTwsO+k=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=pzmOXl/1Ftl1j0WuzO0X2EYJZQDM+k3/nUM8iqSnKdP/H4oQ1kb+xYMZjxJwAK2WLG yySCcTM/Vp1a6AaN4TfAoDyLl9LZxFVzjdzOFonWJGpJPlGSTfDMyorAX1w+ZqBGsNwg Z7CLwOyvnnkN8a/ai3fVGQpqHWbH5XbChzRaw=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.119.12 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <19e8ae197e37.197e3719e8ae@drexel.edu>
References: <19e8ae197e37.197e3719e8ae@drexel.edu>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 03:46:22 -0400
Received: by 10.204.136.15 with SMTP id p15mr1353835bkt.172.1269935182618; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <e9ba5eb81003300046h10eb34cbmb74cb4fb22e5359c@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joydeep Tripathi <joydeep.tripathi@gmail.com>
To: ROLL WG <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [Roll] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-03
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:45:59 -0000

Hi,

We published another draft on Simulation results of RPL. In this
revision, we added path stretch and delay metric comparison of the
packets in RPL routing with shortest path routing. We also added
Simulation results of RPL in a typical home/building routing traffic
scenario. Thanks to Jerry for providing the details of message length
and distribution in such a network. Note, we did not attempt to use
any random topology with a random link quality, cause that might not
provide us with intuition into how real deployment may behave in
presence of link quality variation and link PDR distribution. We also
simulate RPL with a 86 node topology, and in process of simulating it
in another real network of few thousand nodes.

This simulation study shows, the path stretch is very less in
the home/building routing scenario. Also, the delay bound in RPL is
not worse than that of shortest path routing, showing P2P routing in
RPL a viable option for this kind of applications in terms of Path quality.

Looking forward to any comments/suggestions.

Thanks,
Joydeep


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Joydeep Tripathi <jt369@drexel.edu>
Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 3:10 PM
Subject: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-03
To: joydeep.tripathi@gmail.com




---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool <idsubmission@ietf.org>
To: jt369@drexel.edu
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:35:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-03

A new version of I-D, draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-03.txt has
been successfully submitted by Joydeep Tripathi and posted to the IETF
repository.

Filename:        draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation
Revision:        03
Title:           Performance Evaluation of Routing Protocol for Low
Power and Lossy Networks (RPL)
Creation_date:   2010-03-23
WG ID:           Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 15

Abstract:
This document presents a performance evaluation of the Routing
Protocol for Low power and Lossy Networks (RPL).  Detailed
simulations are carried out to produce several routing performance
metrics using a set of real-life scenarios.



The IETF Secretariat.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email