Re: [Roll] Fwd: I-D Action:draft-dt-roll-rpl-00.txt

["Mathilde Durvy (mdurvy)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi All,
 
Thanks for this nice draft! 
A few comments/questions:
 
- 3.3.1.2 shadow cone. In the example given, if node (42) had siblings, they would also be part of its shadow cone, correct?
 
- Must all nodes in a DAG use the same metric(s)  as suggested by section 3.3.1.4.? This seems to conflict with the last paragraphs of section 4.1. What do you mean by consistent parent selection? Does it mean that a node should not join a DAG if it's metric logic does not agree with the metric logic of other nodes in the DAG?
 
- 3.3.1.4.1. I guess Node (N) may also forward traffic via Node (C) if something goes wrong with Node (B) and (E), correct?
 
- 3.3.3.1. " Note that further details of the message and its triggers are still under investigation, including whether or not the DAO should be a IPv6 Hop-By-Hop option or a Neighbor Discovery option." Is it still under investigation given that section 5.5.1.1 speaks only of NA?
 
- 3.4.3 Do you use the state (INCOMPLETE, REACHABLE, STALE, DELAY, PROBE) contained in the neighbor cache table? One way to maintain routing adjacencies would be to use a relatively low reachable time which means that the neighbors will be in STALE state rapidly. Once a neighbor is in this state, any packet for this neighbor will trigger a NS/NA exchange to confirm reachability. However, the data packet will be send before the NS is sent...
 
- 5.4 Item 3. I guess you are talking only about a LBR not any LLN router
 
- 5.4.3.1 " When a new DAG is discovered, the candidate parent that advertises the new DAG is placed in a held up state for the duration of a DAG Hop timer".  What if the node want to be part of both DAGs (its original DAG and the new one), I guess this does not apply.
 
Typos:
- DAG Sibling definition page 5: neighboring node node
- 3.2.4: able to ... discover
- 3.3.1.2: I guess you mean 'consider Node (42)'
- 3.3.1.2: 'the node rooting the DAG may is not'
- 3.3.1.4: lessor -> lesser
- 3.3.4.5: Node (51), (41), (42) and (54)
- 5.1.1.1.5: "this may be useful in cases where more than one LBR"
- 5.2: "candidate neighbor set(, bounded), and"
- 5.5.1.1: "RRcount: 8-bit unsigned integer"
- 5.5.2.1 "The DelayNA timer has a duration that is DEF_NA_LATENCY divided by 2 with the DAG depth". Does this mean 2^(DAG depth)?
 	
Durvy Mathilde
Software Engineer
Technology center

[e-mail]
Phone: [phone]
Mobile: [phone]


Cisco Systems International Sàrl
Av. des Uttins, 5
CH-1180 Rolle

Cisco home page <http://www.cisco.com/> 



 	
  Think before you print.	
This e-mail may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.