Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection
Konrad Iwanicki <iwanicki@mimuw.edu.pl> Wed, 04 March 2020 13:02 UTC
Return-Path: <iwanicki@mimuw.edu.pl>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AE773A0E66 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 05:02:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=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 HXgO-6BR8Yqp for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 05:01:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.mimuw.edu.pl (mail.mimuw.edu.pl [IPv6:2001:6a0:5001::4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 580AC3A0E60 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 05:01:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by duch.mimuw.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABC55605A370D; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:01:54 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mimuw.edu.pl
Received: from duch.mimuw.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mimuw.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id J2gW_ZpHmSS1; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:01:52 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:6a0:5001:2:f041:42a0:d6:8071] (unknown [IPv6:2001:6a0:5001:2:f041:42a0:d6:8071]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by duch.mimuw.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Wed, 4 Mar 2020 14:01:50 +0100 (CET)
From: Konrad Iwanicki <iwanicki@mimuw.edu.pl>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, Ines Robles <mariainesrobles=40googlemail.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <CAP+sJUfcEY2DNEQV=duJdN6P8zZn0ccuei+4ra-B6TcLb5z8Kg@mail.gmail.com> <49ac5fc3-4a3c-fb87-d366-eb7e7cfd60df@mimuw.edu.pl> <CAP+sJUdj4VrmR=+=9_uKyvKOFE5uu98x3Qog43+_tOmTgd+A3A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0cb817c8-cccf-c8bb-1e39-8c6167bf4aa2@mimuw.edu.pl>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2020 14:02:12 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAP+sJUdj4VrmR=+=9_uKyvKOFE5uu98x3Qog43+_tOmTgd+A3A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/IGNy_qcjRav00uPrcxuPfM1u2J8>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 04 Mar 2020 13:02:01 -0000
Dear Ines, On 03.03.2020 13:27, Ines Robles wrote: > Thank you very much for your email to the mailing list and welcome :-) Thank you. > Here are some guidelines [1] to write IETF-Drafts, e.g. as Michael says > for markdown[2], good tools for writing IETF-Drafts [3] and good > tutorials about IETF [4] and for newcomers [5]. > > Please be aware that all the IETF activities follows the note well [6] > > This is our github [7], in general we create one repository for > ietf-draft. If you desire, you could give me your username I can add you > with the permissions, so you can create a repository and put your public > work there. That is very useful to work together and easy for people to > create issues. Sure. That would be great. My login is just: konrad-iwanicki > To submit the draft to the ROLL site, please goes to [8] and select I-D > submission tool: name your draft as > follows: draft-yourlastname-roll-maintopicofdraft-00 and it is going to > be displayed in the section called "Related Internet-Drafts " in the > ROLL Documents page. Thank you for the pointers. Once I am at that stage, it will be extremely useful to have everything in one place. > It would be great if you could attend the IETF 107 remotely [9], so you > can see how it is an IETF meeting. There is no fee to participate > remotely in IETF, but registration is required to access video and other > information via Meetecho. Thanks for the invitation. I will try to find a slot in my agenda. > Please let us know if you need further help. Thank you. This is definitely more than enough for now. Best regards, -- - Konrad Iwanicki. > On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 1:59 PM Konrad Iwanicki <iwanicki@mimuw.edu.pl > <mailto:iwanicki@mimuw..edu.pl>> wrote: > > Dear all, > > I am new to the list, so apologies if I fail to follow some conventions. > > In a nutshell, I would like to propose an extension to RPL that had > been > invented to significantly improve handling crashes of border routers. > Since I have little experience writing RFC-like drafts, I would greatly > appreciate any help. > > Following Dominique’s advice, I did browse the topics that were being > discussed on the ROLL list in the last two years and did not find any > major overlaps. At the same time, the extension seems to match the > current charter of the WG, notably with respect to reliability and > manageability. Below I thus try to briefly motivate and summarize the > extension, so that you can judge how relevant it is and so that > hopefully somebody gets interested in helping to write it up. > > The extension was inspired by numerous commercial LLN deployments, > which > we did for a range of industries. What we noticed in virtually all > cases > is that the major causes of sensor data unavailability were crashes of > border routers. The explanation is rather intuitive. Border routers > typically rely on a tethered power supply and in practice it is often > not economic, or even impossible, to provide them with a battery > backup. > Therefore, power outages are major problems. Another issue is that > border routers are also more intricate, in terms of both hardware and > software, than low-power nodes. As such, they are also more likely to > malfunction. > > What we observed, however, is that RPL does not efficiently handle > crashes of border routers [1][2]. Upon such a failure, tearing down > nonexistent upward routes can take a lot of time (depending on the > data-plane traffic) and generate considerable control traffic, which is > problematic in many applications. > > What we did to address the problem was developing an algorithm, called > RNFD, in which nodes collaborate to monitor the state of a border > router > of the DODAG they belong to [1]. Experiments with a TinyOS > implementation of the algorithm on two testbeds (32 nodes at 2.4GHz and > 76 nodes at 868MHz) and in simulations show that it can outperform bare > RPL: it can detect a border router crash one or two orders of magnitude > faster and with much lower control traffic [1]. > > To verify these results and come up with a way of best integrating RNFD > with RPL, we also did an independent implementation of RNFD (for > which I > did not write a single line of code) and integrated it with RPL-Lite > from ContikiNG [3]. Experiments with that implementation on a > network of > ~150 nodes at 2.4GHz and in a different simulator again confirmed the > aforementioned performance gains resulting from employing RNFD [3]. > > I am looking forward to your comments or questions (and hopefully > volunteers to help me with the draft). Below you can find the previous > citations. I would also be happy to provide more details. > > References: > > [1] K. Iwanicki: “RNFD: Routing-Layer Detection of DODAG (Root) Node > Failures in Low-Power Wireless Networks,” in IPSN 2016: Proceedings of > the 15th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Information Processing in > Sensor Networks. IEEE. Vienna, Austria. April 2016. pp. 1—12. DOI: > 10.1109/IPSN.2016.7460720 > > [2] A. Paszkowska and K. Iwanicki: “Failure Handling in RPL > Implementations: An Experimental Qualitative Study,” in > Mission-Oriented > Sensor Networks and Systems: Art and Science (Habib M. Ammari ed.). > Springer International Publishing. Cham, Switzerland. September 2019. > pp. 49—95. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-91146-5_3 > > [3] P. Ciolkosz: “Integration of the RNFD Algorithm for Border Router > Failure Detection with the RPL Standard for Routing IPv6 Packets,” > Master's Thesis, University of Warsaw. November 2019. > > Best regards, > -- > - Konrad Iwanicki. > > _______________________________________________ > Roll mailing list > Roll@ietf.org <mailto:Roll@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll > > > > _______________________________________________ > Roll mailing list > Roll@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll >
- [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations Ines Robles
- [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Rahul Jadhav
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Ines Robles
- Re: [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis
- Re: [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations Ines Robles
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations Rahul Jadhav
- Re: [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations Ines Robles
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations dominique.barthel
- Re: [Roll] IETF 107: Call for presentations Georgios Z. Papadopoulos
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Border router failure detection Konrad Iwanicki