Re: [Roll] suggested addition to draft-ietf-roll-efficient-npdao

Hi,

Please note  that new IANA considerations and related new text  to a WG
approved document certainly needs WG approval again.

Ines and Peter

On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 10:30 AM Peter van der Stok <stokcons@bbhmail.nl>
wrote:

> Hi Authors,
>
> It is a bit late to change the approved draft.
> It is in IANA editing; and you could write to IANA to apologize for a late
> addition and see how far they are in the process.
> BUT, worse,  how much text is needed to explain this addition?
>
> Adding text to an approved document sounds like opening a can of worms to
> me.
>
> Peter
>
> Rahul Arvind Jadhav schreef op 2019-08-30 09:03:
>
> The DCO could be initiated for regular route invalidation due to path
> changes or because of management decision. The status code can help
> understand the reason for initiating the DCO. I like the idea of this.
>
>
>
> However, I don’t know, procedurally, what it means to changing the draft
> at this stage.
>
>
>
> The changes to draft would include new IANA considerations for the status
> field.
>
>
>
> *From:* Roll [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Pascal Thubert
> (pthubert)
> *Sent:* 30 August 2019 14:43
> *To:* Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* [Roll] suggested addition to draft-ietf-roll-efficient-npdao
>
>
>
> Dear all ;
>
>
>
> I know it’s late but I’d suggest an addition to
> draft-ietf-roll-efficient-npdao. There’s a reserved field in the DCO.
>
> My suggestion is to use it to transport RPL DAO-ACK status values as
> defined in RFC 6550. This way we can signal the reason of the DCO to the
> node.
>
> This will become significant with the RPL-unaware leaves draft, so we can
> rebuild a NA(EARO) with a non-zero status based on a DCO.
>
>
>
> Else the RUL draft will have to update efficient NP DAO, which does not
> look as good.
>
>
>
> Any objection to this?
>
>
>
> Pascal
>
>
>
>    0                   1                   2                   3
>
>      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
>
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>      | RPLInstanceID |K|D|   Flags   |   Reserved    | DCOSequence   |
>
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>      |                                                               |
>
>      +                                                               +
>
>      |                                                               |
>
>      +                            DODAGID(optional)                  +
>
>      |                                                               |
>
>      +                                                               +
>
>      |                                                               |
>
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>      |   Option(s)...
>
>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>