Re: [Roll] Rplinfo WGLC

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 13 March 2017 08:03 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329861294B2 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 01:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.523
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.523 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 WSf1U-k1kJOx for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 01:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 700EA12954D for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 01:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1002; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1489392234; x=1490601834; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=iDu3I48CO/+hKCdX+yurlqSz9Zxw2LpAZGATzRDYzZE=; b=DuynIfLUO2I3OKuJfQ4TZGYkt43DrVJJyRbpYd3nGRredP+YcMVi7cIh cONI4zj4E6ki5hpNwYK+rWBaM1LFGtFApElsKokVrlKpxpSkrjKAGXzBJ 691oxzgM3uO+5nTku7Z2p0PYL6zerTePdBd0guRCeMT91vJ8LB/qapI5d c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AJAwCQUcZY/4UNJK1dGwEBAQMBAQEJAQEBg1GBcoNZig6kfIIPgg6GIgIagi4/GAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRYGIxFVAgEIGgImAgICMBUQAgQbiXivO4ImilUBAQEBAQEBAwEBAQEBAQEhgQuFQ4Rvh1qCXwWcQQGSL5Euk0IBHziBBFgVhxiJO4ENAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,158,1486425600"; d="scan'208";a="1592712"
Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 13 Mar 2017 08:03:53 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v2D83r6J019524 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:03:53 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 03:03:52 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 03:03:52 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] Rplinfo WGLC
Thread-Index: AQHSmpg18Sx1/p/vgEmt0GHjrH1BfaGQl82AgAHSVEA=
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:03:39 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:03:22 +0000
Message-ID: <27ad2ce50790403b8e777000d913c0f4@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <bd7de98208768716791d2ecd9fec5a9d@xs4all.nl> <CAO0Djp350Ey2safaxYNwX4_vRPjhGV-KnXKnExS2KQ=wTS+sVw@mail.gmail.com> <26240.1489270191@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <26240.1489270191@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.228.216.15]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/5Guz2FNJpR-MBNgf_wMRJzCroxI>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Rplinfo WGLC
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 08:03:56 -0000

Dear all:

[RJ] One of the side-effects of always inserting IP-in-IP RPI header at 6LR_1
     (when the traffic originates at ~Raf) is that now all the packets will go
     through the 6LBR even though there exists a shorter P2P path to the
     destination 6LN in storing mode. Consider the case where ~Raf sends a
     packets to 6LN (in RPL domain) and 6LR_i has a shorter P2P path to the
     6LN ....

[MCR] Yes, that's a good point.  I don't see a way to fix that, do you?

[Pascal] Once we have route projection, the root can find that this traffic deserves optimization (based on volume and path length, or additional knowledge on that particular flow)  and project a DAO into 6LR_1.

Take care,

Pascal