Re: [Roll] [roll] #157 (draft-doi-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration): mpl-parameter-configuration-00 - Effect of inconsistent parameter set among nodes

Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp> Mon, 26 May 2014 09:01 UTC

Return-Path: <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
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 C80921A0073 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2014 02:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.357
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.357 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] 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 92aXJF07jhXx for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 May 2014 02:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imx2.toshiba.co.jp (inet-tsb5.toshiba.co.jp [202.33.96.24]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 429AB1A0053 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 02:01:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from arc1.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.194.235]) by imx2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id s4Q9122v020750 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:02 +0900 (JST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by arc1.toshiba.co.jp id s4Q9121A006898 for roll@ietf.org; Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:02 +0900 (JST)
Received: from unknown [133.199.192.144] by arc1.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id UAA06893; Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:02 +0900
Received: from mx11.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp2.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id s4Q911JT023388 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:01 +0900 (JST)
Received: from spiffy21.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id s4Q910N5025425; Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:01 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.196.16.120] (ncg-dhcp120.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp [133.196.16.120]) by spiffy21.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E60D497D24; Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:00 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <538302CC.9020904@toshiba.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 18:01:00 +0900
From: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: roll@ietf.org, draft-doi-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration@tools.ietf.org, mariainesrobles@gmail.com
References: <067.f0fd62a4161a1ac153a9b089b2780010@trac.tools.ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <067.f0fd62a4161a1ac153a9b089b2780010@trac.tools.ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/6guQl4hq57mnWLX1_B8qtjmx1Bc
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #157 (draft-doi-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration): mpl-parameter-configuration-00 - Effect of inconsistent parameter set among nodes
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: Mon, 26 May 2014 09:01:12 -0000

Hi,

Thank you for summarizing issues on my draft.
On #157, my understanding is as follows. If there are any issues you know, please let me know.

Inconsistent but valid parameter does not harm the network much (it may harm battery-powered nodes).

Reason:

1) If a node have smaller Imin/Imax, it takes more responsibility to repeat messages than surrounding nodes. The node will consume more power and the area will have higher traffic than expected until MPL parameters of the node is updated.
2) If a node have larger Imin/Imax, it takes less responsibility to send messages than surrounding nodes. As other nodes will send the message instead of the node with old parameters, effect for traffic load and e2e delay is negligible on dense mesh clusters. If the node with old parameters is on sparse area of a mesh network, larger Imin/Imax will cause larger e2e delay than new parameter's expectation untilthe node is updated.
3) If a node have smaller K, it takes less responsibility to repeat messages than surrounding nodes. On dense network, the effect is negligible. On sparse network, messages pass through the node will have less reliability until the node is updated.
4) If a node have larger K, it will repeat almost all the messages. The area will have excessive traffic untile the node is updated.

Of course, if nodes does not update parameters, they may cause under/overcapacity. All the nodes should have proper timer setting to expire/renew DHCPv6 configuration if the network is likely to be updated. MPL parameter update in my use case is something like 'town rennovation' and does not expect rapid and unscheduled update. So, for example, it is perfectly ok to set the update parameters for weeks, or a month (at least for me).

If you notice anything, please let me know.

Regards,

Yusuke

(2014-05-17 08:00), roll issue tracker wrote:
> #157: mpl-parameter-configuration-00 - Effect of inconsistent parameter set among
> nodes
>
>   Source: [http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg08604.html]
>
>   From: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi at toshiba.co.jp>
>   Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 08:23:26 +0900
>
>   "Typical open topics are:
>
>   1) Effect of inconsistent parameter set among nodes
>      (transitional state / update failure)"
>