[Roll] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Tue, 13 May 2014 09:26 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 342B11A0010; Tue, 13 May 2014 02:26:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.152
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.152 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3PJJDcxwc2e4; Tue, 13 May 2014 02:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-8.cisco.com (alln-iport-8.cisco.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E0B91A0012; Tue, 13 May 2014 02:26:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3330; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1399973177; x=1401182777; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=evDKEIQMSSlWLKau+u4ln7pzcmXnzW7b6GNykuYj5tY=; b=LOb2tS+ZnurxQ7Co+aMcxkfHZCjcH8mqP+fqn2ECqKxFwvZFMtOBfxCk OgUdIsdCMWf/RN1lrTG06XZV4w6eFIfA6bRHhOQ3m/HCjRvqggni8Siix OuWAc0akw/p/8Vk++XEYxLI1SThZCs21UybSxezlx54DY8yl9D3wk6sFv Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,1042,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="43347976"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([]) by alln-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 May 2014 09:26:17 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com []) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s4D9QHL4000665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 13 May 2014 09:26:17 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 13 May 2014 04:26:16 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPboxRAM7nFZ++3UC8TcXZbob1AZs+O9Fg
Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 09:26:16 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Tue, 13 May 2014 09:26:00 +0000
Message-ID: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842658563@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <20140513091837.28963.29591.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140513091837.28963.29591.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/G5ixtXceOmwKM9jrHeyAUSfrBHA
Cc: roll <roll@ietf.org>, "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>, Pat Kinney <pat.kinney@KINNEYCONSULTINGLLC.COM>
Subject: [Roll] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 13 May 2014 09:26:25 -0000

Dear all:

This new version addresses Brian's concerns, in particular the language that relates this proposal with the Flow Label Specification (RFC 6437).
It is made clearer that this is a deviation such as already tolerated for security reasons, and that the compelling reason is energy saving.
The proposal only impacts the use of the flow label inside the LLN and does not result in a deterioration of the application of RFC 6437 inside the Internet. 
The proposal is supported by individuals participating to LLN related groups at the IETF (cc'ed) and external SDOs (ISA100).

The question is now whether we should complete the work at 6MAN or move back to ROLL.

What do you think?


-----Original Message-----
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] 
Sent: mardi 13 mai 2014 11:19
To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert); Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt

A new version of I-D, draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt
has been successfully submitted by Pascal Thubert and posted to the IETF repository.

Name:		draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl
Revision:	02
Title:		The IPv6 Flow Label within a RPL domain
Document date:	2014-05-13
Group:		Individual Submission
Pages:		11
URL:            http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl/
Htmlized:       http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02
Diff:           http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-02

   This document present how the Flow Label can be used inside a RPL
   domain as a replacement to the RPL option and provides rules for the
   root to set and reset the Flow Label when forwarding between the
   inside of RPL domain and the larger Internet, in both direction.
   This new operation saves 44 bits in each frame, and an eventual IP-
   in-IP encapsulation within the RPL domain that is required for all
   packets that reach outside of the RPL domain.


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat