Re: [Roll] RPL-MIB

peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> Mon, 10 February 2014 08:19 UTC

Return-Path: <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A76A81A0690 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:19:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.003
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pd2XisXKSURq for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:19:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-vbr7.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr7.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08C7B1A009A for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:19:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from roundcube.xs4all.nl (roundcube3.xs4all.net [194.109.20.199]) by smtp-vbr7.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s1A8JJ5x019850; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:19:19 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from stokcons@xs4all.nl)
Received: from AMontpellier-654-1-241-199.w92-133.abo.wanadoo.fr ([92.133.12.199]) by roundcube.xs4all.nl with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:19:19 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 09:19:19 +0100
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
To: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <DF1C20CD-4596-4AB7-BFA9-F52AA7C28875@gmail.com>
References: <bcd61e99e8abd20457439d149a3fb75d@xs4all.nl> <DF1C20CD-4596-4AB7-BFA9-F52AA7C28875@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <92131c112cc511e6fdac094b533e27fe@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@xs4all.nl (I8zV/2YJoIWbHpJj44DucsVSVU5t61Hg)
User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail
X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] RPL-MIB
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org, 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: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 08:19:24 -0000

The expectation is that MPL is used where RPL is used as well.

Otherwise a second document is suggested.

Peter

Ralph Droms schreef op 2014-02-09 14:33:
> On Feb 7, 2014, at 5:31 AM 2/7/14, peter van der Stok
> <stokcons@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> 
>> Dear authors,
>> 
>> Is it possible to extend the RPL MIB with MPL parameters?
> 
> Why would MPL parameters be added to the RPL MIB?  MPL and RPL share
> very little, if any, protocol or operational considerations.
> 
> - Ralph
> 
>> 
>> Easy suggestions are per interface the parameters:
>> DATA_MESSAGE_IMIN, DATA_MESSAGE_IMAX, 
>> DATA_MESSAGE_K,DATA_MESSAGE_TIMER_EXPIRATIONS
>> CONTROL_MESSAGE_IMIN, CONTROL_MESSAGE_IMAX, 
>> CONTROL_MESSAGE_K,CONTROL_MESSAGE_TIMER_EXPIRATIONS
>> 
>> per interface: the enabled MC addresses.
>> 
>> Measured values per seed and MC address: low seq nr, high seq nr
>> the number of messages received, number of messages repeated, number 
>> of messages rejected because c>k.
>> 
>> Looking forward to your reply,
>> 
>> Peter
>> 
>> --
>> Peter van der Stok
>> mailto: consultancy@vanderstok.org
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Roll mailing list
>> Roll@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll