Re: [Roll] [6lo] [6tisch] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info

"Turner, Randy" <Randy.Turner@landisgyr.com> Wed, 22 October 2014 12:34 UTC

Return-Path: <Randy.Turner@landisgyr.com>
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 F35D21A90B3; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 05:34:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 BLtk5rV6QJxu; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 05:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am1on0766.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe00::766]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 199B11A8AD7; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 05:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DB4PR01MB0431.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.242.221.22) by DB4PR01MB0429.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com (10.242.221.20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.6.9; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:34:01 +0000
Received: from DB4PR01MB0431.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([10.242.221.22]) by DB4PR01MB0431.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com ([10.242.221.22]) with mapi id 15.00.1054.004; Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:34:01 +0000
From: "Turner, Randy" <Randy.Turner@landisgyr.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [6lo] [6tisch] [Roll] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info
Thread-Index: Ac/oQa0i5HZn0oJrT3qpZBX3hHGwVAAAfziAAVMzxgD//8E8AIAAWlSAgAAgGQCAAIi2gIAAA5cA
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:34:01 +0000
Message-ID: <BCD258A0-9744-44F2-A215-DA6AB55C2FBB@landisgyr.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842E1AEC5@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <CAMsDxWQKgRvY+4LmMEB9LWqNQDipCmeq8ot3aR=wJNedgstVnA@mail.gmail.com> <CADJ9OA94sQESoqAb4uJHV5NML2FroSXk9QfjPBujAUXgsKQfqw@mail.gmail.com> <D06C76D5.2136%randy.turner@landisgyr.com> <CADJ9OA809GACzt0+hCP87eWdBb+QZ=zESf-YbGD+YK73WTVoJw@mail.gmail.com> <4F0DAD50-F95F-4A07-B20C-4A1EC225BC14@amalfisystems.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848A1872F@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848A1872F@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [2601:0:8ec0:4a:c1e5:ade5:1c08:b976]
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:DB4PR01MB0429;
x-forefront-prvs: 037291602B
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(979002)(189002)(24454002)(377454003)(85644002)(377424004)(199003)(55674003)(41574002)(16236675004)(80022003)(86362001)(101416001)(107046002)(122556002)(95666004)(40100003)(4396001)(19625215002)(105586002)(106356001)(99396003)(92566001)(92726001)(46102003)(85852003)(16799955002)(19617315012)(120916001)(110136001)(20776003)(64706001)(2656002)(87936001)(83716003)(76482002)(19580405001)(19580395003)(561944003)(54356999)(50986999)(93886004)(76176999)(82746002)(15975445006)(85306004)(33656002)(31966008)(97736003)(36756003)(21056001)(104396001)(24704002)(3826002)(969003)(989001)(999001)(1009001)(1019001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DB4PR01MB0429; H:DB4PR01MB0431.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com; FPR:; MLV:ovrnspm; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: landisgyr.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=Randy.Turner@landisgyr.com;
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BCD258A0974444F2A215DA6AB55C2FBBlandisgyrcom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: landisgyr.com
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/HBhvfpXCbX193pXtU7IZ7xLZG1c
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [6lo] [6tisch] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info
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: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:34:40 -0000

Hi Pascal

I don't have any specific suggestions at the moment, it was more of a clarification question with regards to the general consensus from the last phone call, since I was unable to participate

Thanks!
Randy



On Oct 22, 2014, at 8:21 AM, "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com<mailto:pthubert@cisco.com>> wrote:

Hello Randy:

6553 is where there was a lot to be gained; OTOH, 6554 already optimizes by factoring prefixes. Would you have suggestions for better?

Cheers,

Pascal

From: 6lo [mailto:6lo-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Randy Turner
Sent: mercredi 22 octobre 2014 06:12
To: Thomas Watteyne
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks; Turner, Randy; 6tisch@ietf.org<mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>; 6lo@ietf.org<mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lo] [6tisch] [Roll] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info

Yes, in Pascal's call for consensus he only mentions 6553... Just curious if the phone call consensus was only about requiring compression of 6553 options...or are there any other compression methods that the minimal draft must include

Thanks!
Randy

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 21, 2014, at 10:16 PM, Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu>> wrote:
Randy,
Are you alluding to 6554?
Thomas

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Turner, Randy <Randy.Turner@landisgyr.com<mailto:Randy.Turner@landisgyr.com>> wrote:

I think I’m +1 on the proposal – was compression of 6553 options the ONLY required compression in the “minimal” case ? (apologies…I wasn’t on the call) I did a quick search of minimal-02 and didn’t see the word compression anywhere.

Thanks!
Randy

From: Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu>>
Reply-To: "roll@ietf.org<mailto:roll@ietf.org>" <roll@ietf.org<mailto:roll@ietf.org>>
Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 at 8:38 PM
To: "roll@ietf.org<mailto:roll@ietf.org>" <roll@ietf.org<mailto:roll@ietf.org>>
Cc: "6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org>" <6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org>>, "6tisch@ietf.org<mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>" <6tisch@ietf.org<mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>>, "6lo@ietf.org<mailto:6lo@ietf.org>" <6lo@ietf.org<mailto:6lo@ietf.org>>, "roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org>" <roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org>>, "6tisch-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:6tisch-chairs@tools.ietf.org>" <6tisch-chairs@tools.ietf.org<mailto:6tisch-chairs@tools.ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info

+1 on the proposal.

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Xavier Vilajosana <xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu<mailto:xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu>> wrote:
All,

I fully support that approach. Hope to contribute and make it happen as soon as possible.

regards,
Xavi

2014-10-15 8:32 GMT+02:00 Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com<mailto:pthubert@cisco.com>>:

Dear all:

During the 6TiSCH bi-weekly virtual interim on Friday, we agreed that the minimal I-D (draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal) must indicate the compression method for the RPL Information (see RFC 6553), so as to ensure interoperation between 6TiSCH devices.

We discussed our options, basically either a 6lo approach or a Flow Label approach. The rough consensus at the call was to try and focus on a 6lo approach and evaluate where that leads us.

Because this means that the minimal draft will have a normative reference on a WIP I-D, we recognized that this approach may delay the publication of the final RFC. Per IETF procedures, the minimal draft will be stalled in the RFC editor queue in MISREF state until the 6lo work completes. So the consensus was also to support the 6lo work so as to expedite it as much as possible.

The idea would be to republish a standard track draft-ietf-6lo- ASAP, based on the existing proposals (which are rapidly converging); then, Xavi would include a normative reference to that work in the minimal I-D before its publication to IESG, which is scheduled in November (yes, this is aggressive).

This is a call to confirm the rough consensus on the ML, open till the next interim call on October 24th. Please provide us with any relevant comment (and participate to the 6lo discussions in the meantime!).

If the result is positive:
- we plan to call for a 6lo WG doc adoption in Hawaii
- we are looking for an aggressive schedule to limit the impact on the publication of the minimal RFC

6TiSCH may host the 6lo discussion so as to:
- benefit from the early morning schedule
- attract more 6TiSCH people to the discussion

More the published minutes:
- Webex recording: https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/lsr.php?RCID=36a3b7df06694258a3ac65bfc519212f
- Wiki: https://bitbucket.org/6tisch/meetings/wiki/141010_webex
- Slides: https://bitbucket.org/6tisch/meetings/src/master/141010_webex/slides_141010_webex.ppt

Cheers,

Pascal

_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org<mailto:Roll@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll


_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org<mailto:Roll@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll



P PLEASE CONSIDER OUR ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING THIS EMAIL.

This e-mail (including any attachments) is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not an intended recipient or an authorized representative of an intended recipient, you are prohibited from using, copying or distributing the information in this e-mail or its attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete all copies of this message and any attachments. Thank you.

_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
6tisch@ietf.org<mailto:6tisch@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

_______________________________________________
6lo mailing list
6lo@ietf.org<mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo