Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec
Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 08 June 2012 11:24 UTC
Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.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 121D821F88C7 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 04:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LVSkaOOX8eAU for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 04:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A62021F88C5 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 04:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so1059025vbb.31 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 04:24:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=viUt6d3UgLWy1Bcr4G4VlRHv2751lQf03tUO6HOuVZU=; b=bs7XOyXl7NHcGlwLgBhU5U1/8nnJY8lJnT9dJXp6OONZhAWpY8DrK6cyUnPAo5DlHq 4whb6GRDX+MQtG7XsZ4ZlZp99m9kYfuD3oIyKXAIASFC9F5/CZsc3miT8MZMsaMfO+xp 61WFq++lBxqA9v+yAulhNfnHpF0WoF6OqZNXiKjH46PFMJx/poh/6SIxrGqHIcHrYyRj tJ2ZodLM5J13TfJmJbNlvb3A2VF60uhZkus3B1Cp4dmH252O9lSI4bQZhJskn8vZX646 M2s8VB85jAucHpBE9BrHNO6yf6zE509s3qRRQytgZTh13Hn5x4eHonI4AiQ4BLqma9sf 4/UA==
Received: by 10.52.97.230 with SMTP id ed6mr4905812vdb.65.1339154681710; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 04:24:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-rdroms-8912.cisco.com (rtp-isp-nat1.cisco.com. [64.102.254.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i10sm9220207vdw.21.2012.06.08.04.24.39 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 08 Jun 2012 04:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <592959538.629424.1339154557575.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 07:24:38 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1E2F4795-3DE4-4231-8CCC-38953DA203F7@gmail.com>
References: <592959538.629424.1339154557575.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
To: Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: Haberman Brian <brian@innovationslab.net>, Stiemerling Martin <mstiemerling@googlemail.com>, roll <roll@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 11:24:43 -0000
On Jun 8, 2012, at 7:22 AM 6/8/12, Mukul Goyal wrote: >> Is the receiving node supposed to infer that the selected metric for a RPL Instance using MRHOF is the one metric container included in the DIO (or, in the case of ETX, there is no metric container)? > > In my opinion, yes. Where is that behavior explicitly described in the relevant specifications? - Ralph > > Mukul > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ralph Droms" <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> > To: "Mukul Goyal" <mukul@uwm.edu> > Cc: "Ralph Droms" <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>, "Stiemerling Martin" <mstiemerling@googlemail.com>, "Michael Richardson" <mcr@sandelman.ca>, "roll" <roll@ietf.org>, "Haberman Brian" <brian@innovationslab.net>, "Philip Levis" <pal@cs.stanford.edu> > Sent: Friday, June 8, 2012 6:18:54 AM > Subject: Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec > > > On Jun 8, 2012, at 7:16 AM 6/8/12, Mukul Goyal wrote: > >>> Without encoding the metric in the OCP, how does a node know what metric is in use in an advertised RPL Instance. >> >> The metrics inside the metric container inside the DIOs it receives from its candidate parents. Only the DAG root needs to be configured regarding merics in use. Other nodes would know the metrics in use by looking inside the metric container of the DIOs they receive. > > Is the receiving node supposed to infer that the selected metric for a RPL Instance using MRHOF is the one metric container included in the DIO (or, in the case of ETX, there is no metric container)? > > - Ralph > >> >> Mukul >> >> >>> How does a node choose which RPL Instance(s) to join without learning which metrics are in use? >> >> - Ralph >> >>> >>> Phil >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Roll mailing list >> Roll@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll >
- [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Omprakash Gnawali
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec JP Vasseur
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Brian Haberman
- [Roll] Enhanced RPL functionality on J-Sim platfo… Panos Trakadas
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Don Sturek
- Re: [Roll] Enhanced RPL functionality on J-Sim pl… Ulrich Herberg
- [Roll] Σχετ: Enhanced RPL functionality on J-Sim … Panos Trakadas
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Omprakash Gnawali
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Panos Trakadas
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Omprakash Gnawali
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Mukul Goyal
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Omprakash Gnawali
- Re: [Roll] Ralph's DISCUSS on MRHOF spec Ralph Droms