Re: [Roll] [roll] #98: Who decides what metrics go in the metric container inside the Measurement Request?

"roll issue tracker" <> Mon, 04 June 2012 15:08 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFD7321F8890 for <>; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 08:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Tlx3boc2bnk for <>; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 08:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B6BB21F8864 for <>; Mon, 4 Jun 2012 08:08:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] by with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <>) id 1SbYtB-0008G9-KD; Mon, 04 Jun 2012 11:08:14 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: "roll issue tracker" <>
X-Trac-Version: 0.12.2
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.2, by Edgewall Software
To: mukul@UWM.EDU,
X-Trac-Project: roll
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:08:12 -0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 98
In-Reply-To: <>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: mukul@UWM.EDU,,
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on; SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #98: Who decides what metrics go in the metric container inside the Measurement Request?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 15:08:16 -0000

#98: Who decides what metrics go in the metric container inside the Measurement

Changes (by jpv@…):

 * status:  new => closed
 * resolution:   => fixed


 From: "Philip Levis" <>
 To: "Mukul Goyal" <>
 Cc: "roll" <>
 Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 7:31:39 PM
 Subject: Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-p2p-measurement-05.txt

 The new draft addresses all of my comments. The overview section is much
 clearer and unambiguous.


 On May 9, 2012, at 4:27 PM, Mukul Goyal wrote:

 This version takes care of ticket #98 (created in response to LC comment
 by Phil Levis) and has the following changes:

 1) Updated the overview section. This section now has better explanation
 of the mechanism and explicitly clarifies the following:
 1.1) The route being measured is from the origin to the target.
 1.2) The origin decides what metrics are measured.

 2) Section 4 (Originating a Measurement Request) now clearly says:

 "The Origin MUST also include the routing metric objects of
  interest inside one or more Metric Container options inside the MO.

 3) Section 5 (Processing a Measurement Request at an Intermediate Router)
 now clearly says:

 "An Intermediate Router can
  only update the existing metric objects and MUST NOT add any new
  routing metric object to the Metric Container.  An Intermediate
  Router MUST drop the MO if it cannot update a routing metric object
  specified inside the Metric Container."

 4) Updated the IANA section to include the correct language as per

 These modifications should remove the perceived ambiguity (regarding who
 decides which metrics would be measured) reported in Ticket #98.


 Reporter:  jpv@…                  |       Owner:  mukul@…
     Type:  defect                 |      Status:  closed
 Priority:  major                  |   Milestone:
Component:  p2p-rpl                |     Version:
 Severity:  Submitted WG Document  |  Resolution:  fixed
 Keywords:                         |

Ticket URL: <>
roll <>