Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-13

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 13 April 2020 07:49 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 DABBB3A111F for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 00:49:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.591
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.591 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 header.b=NZvGXn1z; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=ivC1d/gF
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 zczURkpvIbT3 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 00:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FA893A1118 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 00:49:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3056; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1586764171; x=1587973771; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=mEpBL6NwcnqycYC6gT1kzH0tffGtrbcXBemx5gfSNKc=; b=NZvGXn1zA6pAhl/1foIloNC+bma99K8xqZHu8cOWAMY0U3p9kcJ2Wrj+ v2KdyCn9gxpArKBKnx5+vllkB89xWxch/rA322Y/FJfAgfzXpjsLslcQO wPXxjd5tmpwXfZ7Mrxy51v+jQoRtpxlSEAXuWyzF5CEA0MRU9RxlqI+bh Y=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AYocxxhUGzwF/aL3LByCo9lOdWcjV8LGuZFwc94?= =?us-ascii?q?YnhrRSc6+q45XlOgnF6O5wiEPSA9yJ8OpK3uzRta2oGXcN55qMqjgjSNRNTF?= =?us-ascii?q?dE7KdehAk8GIiAAEz/IuTtankiAMRfXlJ/41mwMFNeH4D1YFiB6nA=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ATCQBKGZRe/5FdJa1mHAEBAQEBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BEQEEBAEBgXuBVFAFbFggBAsqhByDRgOKZ06CEYEBlyKCUgNUCgEBAQwBARg?= =?us-ascii?q?LCgIEAQGERAIXgXkkOBMCAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBQRthVYMhXEBAQECAQEBEBE?= =?us-ascii?q?RDAEBJQcMBAsCAQgaAiYCAgIlCxUQAgQTIoJ/BAEBgksDDiABDqNHAoE5iGJ?= =?us-ascii?q?1gTKCfwEBBYUJGIIOAwaBDiqCYolTGoFBP4ERJxyCGDU+gmcBAYR3MoIsjhS?= =?us-ascii?q?DA6A9CoJBl08dnCasGQIEAgQFAg4BAQWBaSINgUpwFTsqAYI+UBgNjSMMF4N?= =?us-ascii?q?QhRSFQXSBKYtvLIIZAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.72,378,1580774400"; d="scan'208";a="488324865"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 13 Apr 2020 07:49:10 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 03D7nAKK010601 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 07:49:10 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 02:49:10 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 02:49:09 -0500
Received: from NAM12-DM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 02:49:09 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=O3Mul5nJ5/X67BrH03HwxsMKg9v6cf3xC0D6nwPiw2hNmy9xotsDTgRXp9daxIREr6nH6PK2qu86tBO8FZv9U6E7f1TB2XN4efCNK8foo2PaVxPdj7VwrUfX9c+iUGU7LWQBxDhZ8l+7bygMY+gr9zVYoG61EHAfpr6rISj7vXulVQs6LghMvrRLWBi39Mhu1jWc9Yi78kUjHs9W5FRVN7rsdwK4ZGC9cByY8Y2YthSUQYePvueyurqNjiuPqxBFW0xIrUnD9uDMSGtLwYcYdsw0d+JJIf7ilQoJxM4IhyU4Jem/fhjYXkId+Z2pmPyarJrQG0ZLPHsQgkWnTCPTpQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=mEpBL6NwcnqycYC6gT1kzH0tffGtrbcXBemx5gfSNKc=; b=MWeY3AZ5lBP9D7unQuUGVGhG72R33wPxKrIQZPyy2GnEsOnr5gjQIQIRhNCf6KBumH+aCSVNh+3LDoG74jnw4nXMcJmGtYz5uR68fG/HamH2yIQD4joaSLcFAdHBpK0Cqt8l1Rko5TvpN9APYCLlUZqakwravxcqtBd8CR0iSv1U7HiO4SzMJv6CYnAdM/ahIVAJD2pSFyO1mZq8qD0VhfdPSbRrujs8O4Ugbmun3QulAXJKW21guScWRQiM7DQqYhBVWmiifPqBw1mKZnXAQWgouKPP+2z4MWIm4ExWtym2tX9hY+gWlpVXLelID01ryxzw0NefFni8HNhdNZVAAQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=mEpBL6NwcnqycYC6gT1kzH0tffGtrbcXBemx5gfSNKc=; b=ivC1d/gF8L5HJnzjP+cdd0cKXwHXzyem2FsAJk79CDFsKoDP8fsRz2zpmgB8c0id7T9jJZipTWhYJvnHpXRyVX04oYLqwvVZOaT74eHf5hp22rQcCG1X8dik0+/ZTBx3qIX/NcnldHqiN+ifiXVmUodx/ffnyrDJj+bW1U18v7g=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:ea::31) by MN2PR11MB4629.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:264::9) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2900.15; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 07:49:08 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::113b:3127:ef12:ea7]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::113b:3127:ef12:ea7%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2900.028; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 07:49:08 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-13
Thread-Index: AQHV/Ro9AOfHATbWbk+HyMb2raYz4qhtjAx3gAFYroCAAglh4IABNtCAgAAAwqCAAg64AIAAEJYDgADhqICAAJ79uYAAnUOAgABy794=
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 07:49:08 +0000
Message-ID: <05603BA6-3BF1-4C27-B39A-D64A2D975CED@cisco.com>
References: <CAP+sJUe7oF74F96zi5RuE985CD9LzNfwad=Zzstc8uat2wc3aQ@mail.gmail.com> <25495_1585151124_5E7B7C94_25495_267_1_DAA13A41.7291B%dominique.barthel@orange.com> <CAP+sJUchX+q_cX4_fOytz+q5RfjN+L51VM-+Auz4jVxK-6wpOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAO0Djp1QGASEu4fasZD6K6CSD0q-7F+CD0_JOOppWnnABdbo5w@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB35650537494AB9FB8E0849D1D8C10@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAO0Djp1-SYaYGwpdBsUbK07_HPN=Had_MqJidXfPg1fBM4wHPg@mail.gmail.com>, <MN2PR11MB3565A72C53705EEF21DAD237D8DF0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>, <BM1PR01MB40208D80481AD0AEC7F9746FA9DF0@BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>, <91157D69-4945-4FFD-A221-14702DA03868@cisco.com>, <BM1PR01MB402002EB400323452E83EC3CA9DC0@BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>, <16E40B89-3E69-4468-9830-C51A596FF7EE@cisco.com>, <BM1PR01MB40201FC6B675907DB94FCF03A9DD0@BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <BM1PR01MB40201FC6B675907DB94FCF03A9DD0@BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pthubert@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2a01:cb1d:4ec:2200:fcfb:bdd2:ef56:22b2]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: eb41fe74-9fc6-427d-88c1-08d7df7f25ee
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4629:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB46293CB8892B7FFC8FB67A13D8DD0@MN2PR11MB4629.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 037291602B
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(376002)(366004)(346002)(136003)(396003)(39860400002)(966005)(8936002)(316002)(33656002)(2616005)(6506007)(478600001)(71200400001)(86362001)(81156014)(36756003)(8676002)(2906002)(186003)(66946007)(91956017)(66574012)(6486002)(5660300002)(76116006)(66476007)(64756008)(6512007)(66446008)(66556008)(6916009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: lOCoEfCc4fjhcOVbQoT7dts8WSAm7J95RG38pnCg5X8icTc1ZhSM2jMOO+ZpNpLN+7HNX/NAQGz7ESqiJ2CVfwHs7EPmQJPXlAcgtKfk9aCePDxInjqTW57RTCjAX9i9zim8Lm+OWPO3GK6bMAy4TgLSnoTRX21OeqYrsjxKDmjgKBThiOynzav5rRAOBOdQO/D5c8rL/sYw0VheH/5tpA==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: eb41fe74-9fc6-427d-88c1-08d7df7f25ee
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 13 Apr 2020 07:49:08.4985 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: lfmBpVXoT3fSHu+VeRyiV1uuNH1NKI3KOjmDPaqoGcfDSgqvJxc5CfK/q57QE7D/DzaVSzCeT/2n46Bo36aj4g==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4629
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.14, xch-aln-004.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-9.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/5SlTQtM7L87SyCpJ-_fcYiN-5P8>
Subject: Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-13
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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 Apr 2020 07:49:40 -0000

WFM, Rahul 

Note that the issue is the lifetime 0 arriving faster than over the new path, causing the 6 LBR to temporarily remove the state. This is why there’s a timer at the 6LBR. The new text in the RUL draft also indicates to send the lifetime =0 last. This is not a guarantee but it helps.

Stay safe and many thanks again!

Pascal

> Le 13 avr. 2020 à 02:58, Rahul Jadhav <nyrahul@outlook.com> a écrit :
> 
> 
> That’s interesting because the 6LR would not know that a parent erased the ROVR. So it’s probably safer to send the EDAR upon a termination NS AERO.
> 
> [RJ] It's probably safer to send EDAR from attached-6LR upon a termination NA EARO to 6LBR. This would remove the dependency on ROVR been sent intact en route the storing MOP path. However, all these issues are with storing MOP only. In non-storing MOP, this additional EDAR will be wasteful since target+ROVR can be carried safely to the root.
> 
> 
> OTOH that EDAR may collision with another if the node moved. RFC 8505 has text for that.
> What do you think?
> 
> [RJ] If EDAR collides, we can count on TID to handle this. 8505 makes it clear.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> Le 12 avr. 2020 à 08:06, Rahul Jadhav <nyrahul@outlook.com> a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>> Yes that was the proposal and yes the cost is high. Maybe we could MUST a knob to turn it on if it is not always?
>> 
>> [RJ] Agree, conditionally will be better. One more thing that I realized that intermediate 6LRs won't be able to generate a DAO with the ROVR when they generate it by themselves i.e., on parent-switch, ... unless they maintain ROVR in the routing entry context.
> Is this the case?
> 
>> Another thing to consider for backward compatibility, in storing MOP the intermediate 6LRs who do not support this draft may just zero out the ROVRsz and the ROVR field depending on how the implementation is done. For e.g., contiki-ng just forwards the DAO
> based on the downstream input DAO and won't have an issue but any other implementation which generates the DAO locally based on routing entry will have an issue.
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll