[Roll] Remaining issues on draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension

Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis <aris@ariskou.com> Tue, 10 March 2020 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <aris@ariskou.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AC663A12F9 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:24:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=mailfence.com header.b=hXFVHejm; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ariskou.com header.b=I5oY1yY8
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0VFk22xNU-bF for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-l3b-97.contactoffice.com (mailout-l3b-97.contactoffice.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5402F3A12D8 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:24:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpauth2.co-bxl (smtpauth2.co-bxl []) by mailout-l3b-97.contactoffice.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7831AA for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:24:36 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailfence.com; s=20160819-nLV10XS2; t=1583857476; bh=d0JkVpGcoX7DaeUYSstegOguIkBTvvin4znVu1Zu2ik=; h=From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=hXFVHejmriGvqXtqJY77H3QUosodwhooInR7nJ7wxTjqbFzGvRnBb2vITwJ5PEvn+ sbWXAEPWYVOyL0PosfFNh+AkO62G0nS20W/nTugJFqzYHhs2J+QDKIeJ5IyjmO4mx2 SSU3BQY/dNCJDJW+u+PZbb0I6AY23fs60NIhI6I6eT+rMpGgHrJzlyqo415Cq8w0gS x04/SeB0P3dCg5wkC5+EddTHRsZFBkYA22CrY1zzRl0dBDiWvF7FOjd/S5sIAOgP5N Ed7Ua+wxBAtT8e/RTd5bXuxZgGtWjgzZiiHE1UE19liRqm+flyNKE/SUBB3xPRqdqB YkKf2p2j34qZQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1583857476; s=20191001-wvim; d=ariskou.com; i=aris@ariskou.com; h=MIME-Version:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To:Cc:Content-Type; l=4987; bh=d0JkVpGcoX7DaeUYSstegOguIkBTvvin4znVu1Zu2ik=; b=I5oY1yY8+K+ouuSN/Xd2mBXFqb+rhsqC5UB0MG+2gN+zCtUVk0G9vQaWLyNI4Cq1 KN1SDglJ+ZNbwr6jhJp00agruJUiuL4Lqo72eUQ4M97Iws8CKg3GA22xDDpzlYm7V2j rFWqibBeczzqhpErJTdTZgBrWtWqHzWg8wJ5OXboRVNQ3WcNU+YlE96JJB5XwrT9V8x Qn/lUn+B3aLVw0LBmCxH6wqgNhLk3VyzwgsDcn2UrqfQ23EqgEj50EIwask/oTAe+vf 5lHu4gSJm4FceVNy4p+p+zNEWpKxfz+2LM4tSW2W5EsFo8dKeITq7A8uiC2UBAhRd2E R+1wdRdfzQ==
Received: by smtp.mailfence.com with ESMTPA for <roll@ietf.org> ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:24:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-io1-f54.google.com with SMTP id h131so12691663iof.1 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3xZyhuZ2FMaFvLrKR8q3V5Z4lfzakb+pm8LYhdvknSUCPaU6CJ Vd4mh+3QXT/nl3MaXH5btl3hZ9EaxicimAA63RM=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsw84Umixl2ucXNyDoleZaZS4oMnSWLqXBiVvc81jnQc4k1GgfP796r5dzjUjXAMApClkyyvLHxOPb+lY11SLU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:cf:: with SMTP id z15mr18563835ioe.13.1583857469323; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:24:29 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis <aris@ariskou.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:24:33 +0100
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAK76PrmKVKXhPpcH6eq=f5O_rE0k0z-8dZouDeZddBbznftZPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK76PrmKVKXhPpcH6eq=f5O_rE0k0z-8dZouDeZddBbznftZPQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: roll <roll@ietf.org>, dominique barthel <dominique.barthel@orange.com>, INES ROBLES <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Cc: "Georgios Z. Papadopoulos" <georgios.papadopoulos@imt-atlantique.fr>, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d5828205a0828d81"
X-ContactOffice-Account: com:113819248
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/8Wf9JAQoUY2puFtxI3nRERox9Hs>
Subject: [Roll] Remaining issues on draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension
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: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:24:41 -0000

Dear roll,

we have now submitted all the agreed upon changes to the
draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension-07 (will present them at the meeting).

One small mistake is the reversal of a CAN to MAY that Dominique made, but
we found that we had missed that after the submission system closed, so we
will fix in -08 once the submission system re-opens.

Two small issues remain:

a) Compression of the PS IPv6 addresses.
Rahul brought this up in his review, we mentioned that this was proposed
before, implemented and then re-removed because of the plan to have a draft
that performs compression on all RPL control traffic packets (following
Pascal's and Dominique's advice).
*Question: is there any chance this has changed and we might want to
perform compression on the PS field specifically after all?*

b) Change of the context of the PS NSA object from a constraint to a metric.
Following  Dominique's suggestion we changed it from a constraint to a
recorded (R=1), partial (P=1) metric (C=0).
The issue is that we are extending MRHOF and MRHOF supports the use of a
single metric for computing the rank.
It is true that the PS NSA object is not used for rank calculation, and we
have clarified this.
However, there might be still a conflict or a point to be clarified.
See in MRHOF Section 2 Terminology
"Selected metric:  The metric chosen for path selection by the network
operator.  MRHOF supports using a single metric for path selection."

VS our draft Section 5.1 "Usage"
"It is important that the PS does not affect the calculation of the rank
through candidate neighbors.  It is only used with the CA OF to remove
nodes which do not fulfill the CA OF criteria from the candidate neighbor
*Question: Is this sufficient in terms of explanation?*

We would really appreciate answers on these, if possible of course, before
the ROLL meeting so that we can update/finalize the drafts.

Kind regards,
Aris & Georgios