IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] cabilities in DIO messages

Rahul Arvind Jadhav <rahul.jadhav@huawei.com> Wed, 19 December 2018 09:19 UTC

Return-Path: <rahul.jadhav@huawei.com>
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 2568F130DEF for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 01:19:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 A3eBUTDJGWZQ for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 01:19:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94A2B130DC8 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 01:19:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B2883197361A7 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:19:10 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from BLREML703-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.20.4.172) by lhreml708-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:19:12 +0000
Received: from BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.9.149]) by blreml703-cah.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 14:48:59 +0530
From: Rahul Arvind Jadhav <rahul.jadhav@huawei.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] cabilities in DIO messages
Thread-Index: AQHUlu/OU42JSYkPF0S9xqZrDEcr46WFxNpg
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:18:59 +0000
Message-ID: <982B626E107E334DBE601D979F31785C5DD4E0A0@BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <CAO0Djp0wiHUg15SfLzqXRF6Ko9JBbeL7C9CLZ6HRXcNxf+=Gew@mail.gmail.com> <0cb3313f79eb475090937a932b793efc@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>, <16712.1545069107@localhost> <6811D20F-DC62-4E16-86EE-684BD288E2CF@cisco.com> <982B626E107E334DBE601D979F31785C5DD4D8E0@BLREML503-MBX.china.huawei.com> <32467.1545150953@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <32467.1545150953@localhost>
Accept-Language: en-IN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.18.157.44]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/IZZ97bFATaK4Mkp3_2kiqbYW2Qo>
Subject: Re: [Roll] cabilities in DIO messages
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, 19 Dec 2018 09:19:21 -0000

> 
> Rahul Arvind Jadhav <rahul.jadhav@huawei.com> wrote:
>     > I'm wondering apart from MOP extension, it would be nice to have
>     > capability flags in DIO.
>     > 1. Capabilities field can work with ext-MOP to handshake additional
>     > capabilities ..
>     > 2. Even leaf nodes can
>     > understand capabilities ...
> 
> I think we should continue this conversation.
> Are they negotiated, or simply declared? ("I can do X")
> 

I had simple declaration in mind but negotiation would be more powerful and also does not add much overhead. We already have the signaling primitives (DIO-DAO-ACK)to handle it. Capabilities can be a new rpl control message option and optionally added if required in RPL ctrl msg.
Do we require to tag optional data along with capabilities flag?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email