IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Rplinfo WGLC

Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com> Mon, 13 March 2017 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <mariainesrobles@googlemail.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 EEEC71298A0 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:35:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=googlemail.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 MSltedEPek1K for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x231.google.com (mail-ua0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36C1C12984A for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x231.google.com with SMTP id u30so158070017uau.0 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:35:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=yP3hI2mzXjqaHOYKKr23goJd+D3krmiVzmIWu3SPno8=; b=mdzDDHS8g0fYaGtN/HeSVfqT7LI07U0u/lEvZD0w2OORbm9E4gWVK+vWga2Fheautm 5pu01a6p59QAB15t6G2veGAwVPYJc0sbjlNVVMAgmStfZ9mjyiCjwhGYZZIqEg8wjCJx xqgwxvoVlqrXV7VzrgABCy6hNp2UqJhhGjYUWUbI0wbE8v5nX4W6iDC+RH0MBDzwXlXj l8qsolhR/a40henAYf5l8hUySnWcGaHnIIgNncThgfn2obNvR/gpbCfTLPxYkBHX9jw9 JKuZLgO/msKA+edBAqI6mP+fYgmvV+UWqSwhls/EAiKWMZfheFpcZ9SXWa8Aq83QJqSk vdgA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=yP3hI2mzXjqaHOYKKr23goJd+D3krmiVzmIWu3SPno8=; b=uGM3eD4U4pbPexagoxbmK5zYKs66diu7xdY5xZaHJ93Ord69sc5f5ws79e2BNLttkL TdoWindgaoSYeFkXeEh0XrWUyoNEdr3X0zDN+2wzHCnuMTAOKAWFpaR238R+HDS7GJ+e CnvRCMzo6xZKdyj0MoXz0dnBMZA4hFi/x4fQYcGNriTf2b8grKqiclNQDWTeX5G6Fqht jVTnFQulEh0n4J09G+QN5fAE3o9PRTN8dyVFzGgdvE89uAktDb1l4uneuk+Bg5h/MEU5 z6ZzFMrNzOz2QW/wUlfQz5EuTeMyWSoDx+ayGVLaMxNmdhrsI26RZn1vniO6xeIgJcA9 JM1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mIU49QZoJOnEkJDVGRZOTODhhDLLAHIZG4eaQM5j4F4wo9gZwJ8/OBgIVUOTmbyH1113aXpWpuP/0DXg==
X-Received: by 10.176.74.68 with SMTP id r4mr16069378uae.55.1489426552238; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:35:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.85.130 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:35:51 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <27ad2ce50790403b8e777000d913c0f4@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <bd7de98208768716791d2ecd9fec5a9d@xs4all.nl> <CAO0Djp350Ey2safaxYNwX4_vRPjhGV-KnXKnExS2KQ=wTS+sVw@mail.gmail.com> <26240.1489270191@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <27ad2ce50790403b8e777000d913c0f4@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
From: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 14:35:51 -0300
Message-ID: <CAP+sJUc1m+PdhVqa+QQXwek-f7A6kDQBM_5zQtrwg+THbbWZKw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045f8e9c90b85f054aa024ff"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/7SCrEmjk67Is22UqGt6XkfGfgcQ>
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 17:35:55 -0000

Hi,

A new version (version 12) was just submitted to address these comments.

Thank you very much Rahul,

Michael, Pascal and Ines.

2017-03-13 5:03 GMT-03:00 Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>:

> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email