Re: [Roll] IETF 109 open Questions on P-DAO

["Huimin She (hushe)" <[e-mail]>]

Thank you, Pascal.

I have a few more questions as following.

1. How does the egress know that a local RPL instance is associated with it? For example, in non-storing mode, the P-DAO message is sent to the ingress.

2. A local RPL instance is rooted at the egress. In fact, it is not a normal RPL since there is no RPL maintaining messages such as: DIO, NS, DAO etc.


Best regards,
Huimin 

    Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:22:04 +0000
    From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <[e-mail]>
    To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <[e-mail]>
    Subject: [Roll] IETF 109 open Questions on P-DAO
    Message-ID:
    	<[e-mail]>

    Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

    Dear all

    The slides for the P-DAO discussion at IETF 109 are available here:

    https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/slides-109-roll-dao-projection/

    There are a number of open questions that we starting discussing, and would need to progress on the list.
    Some of them were expressed on the list, e.g., from Huimin She. I'd like to progress on them all with individual threads.
    The questions are:


      1.  Lifetime Unit: could we use a different unit for P-DAO?
      2.  How to differentiate a P-DAO from a normal DAO in a local instance; new flag?
      3.  Make P-DAO bidirectional?
      4.  Who sends the PDR? Does it have to be the ingress? If it was egress it could propose a TrackId from its namespace. Else could the ingress be the root?
      5.  Maintaining the sibling state. Should we have text on using RFC 8505 there?
      6.  Whether ingress and egress are listed in NPO? Today they are both, ingress to indicate the packet source in case of encapsulation and for SRH-6LoRH compression reference and egress to build the full SRH-6LoRH. Note that the ingress must consume the first entry and use it as source.
      7.  Track in Track vs. SR Header reload models, see slides

    Let me open threads to follow up.

    Keep safe

    Pascal