[Roll] DRAFT minutes from IETF86

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 22 March 2013 18:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EEB421F8FDC for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 11:16:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.416
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.416 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.132, BAYES_00=-2.599, SARE_MILLIONSOF=0.315]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QQ59iUn0Skw8 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 11:16:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (unknown [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C45ED21F8FD4 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 11:16:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca []) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E834C2016D for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:24:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 3784A639D7; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:15:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost []) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27E6F639D5 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:15:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 14:15:55 -0400
Message-ID: <20484.1363976155@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Subject: [Roll] DRAFT minutes from IETF86
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 18:16:07 -0000

Thank you to Dan King and Ines Robles for these notes.

TUESDAY, March 12, 2013
0900-1020 Morning Session I

Home/Building/P2P Applicability Status
6tsch work
industrial applicability

1) Note Well and Agenda Bashing

2) Document status



Feature discussion, sending data in a payload. Discussion regarding the data
format and is it application specific.
Also if prefix information object was valid for P2P. You need source route
info, what would be the preference. There is a restricted set of P2P DIOs,
any changes will need justification.


Adrian Farrel (as AD) provided SECDIR review update. If authors have a new
version in the next week then it can be kept on the agenda. Co-chairs to
make the authors aware of this.


AD has provided review/comments. Author has reissued the document.




Comment from WG that DNS service discovery, in context of home net/college
campuses, et al., as a method of lightweight distribution. Commentator will
post comments on list.

3) Applicability Statements



Comments on the use of RPL in Building and Home Environments. It was felt
that more info was needed, especially regarding configuration parameters.
Specifically on infrastructure nodes and p2p traffic.

Suggestion to focus on indoor building commercial applications, controlled
environments, and remove home content.

Co-chairs reluctant to change the name, but fine to reaffirm the building
applicability, and list technologies.

Co-chairs reiterated that the document should reflect goals of the group.
Furthermore, a request to avoid biasing or restricting technology (P2P, MPL,
DNS, IPv6, etc.) the solution in the document.

Document needs to be applicable to p2p and infrastructure.

Co-chairs would like to target Last Call around IETF 88.

4) Discussion/question: do applicability statements stand alone?

No comments.

5) 6TSCH summary/invite

New mailing list 6tsch (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6tsch/)
Discussions have included audio conferences. Webex info published for access
on the list (above).
Discussing use cases and problem statements.
Comment made regarding time synchronization and reservation. Are existing
tools are being considered (including NTP). Confirmed that NTP is used on
the backbone, and across LLNs it would be complimentary.
Various aspects of synchronization discussed in architecture document.
However, it is important to consider synchronisation versus energy trade
All options are being explored. As is various applicability to other
Concerns raised that any potential solution(s) need(s) to scale to
potentially millions of devices.
Request that people participate on the list, and the informal sessions (one
of which follows the ROLL WG).
See the list for notification of interim meetings.

Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>;, Sandelman Software Works 
IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/