Re: [Roll] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: (with COMMENT)

Charles Perkins <charliep@lupinlodge.com> Wed, 18 August 2021 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <charliep@lupinlodge.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 A9CAB3A1BA7; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:10:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lupinlodge.com
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 V3qeRWDjcZgX; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from delivery.mailspamprotection.com (delivery.mailspamprotection.com [146.66.121.166]) (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 148913A1BA4; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:10:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 246.206.208.35.bc.googleusercontent.com ([35.208.206.246] helo=giowm1055.siteground.biz) by se22.mailspamprotection.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <charliep@lupinlodge.com>) id 1mGRt3-000AK2-73; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 15:10:15 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lupinlodge.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=Quz6jpXH6peYbnu/O49kzJblQD7LDpwJJDuVBo37lIM=; b=LQHmkE89rC52VOvVm9Vc5PsDyv nft9aZFroIylLXL8whk0tkMAwZpFX49h0kv2vE8TLCfzo6HsCb0wpZ8i9Afo9niMit9FNXhQWa+Qg AQdNpDqV7p5nEziOT9aLVxNkYnWUqy+1GUSpD/sTQlTDl7me3RU1FH4EvU7uMlnXaZek=;
Received: from [99.51.72.196] (port=65266 helo=[192.168.1.72]) by giowm1055.siteground.biz with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.90-.1) (envelope-from <charliep@lupinlodge.com>) id 1mGRt0-000HBb-S6; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:10:06 +0000
To: Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: roll-chairs@ietf.org, mariainesrobles@googlemail.com, draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl@ietf.org
References: <161884704906.8680.6192562844809236074@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Charles Perkins <charliep@lupinlodge.com>
Message-ID: <d7b80f35-012b-4cf0-7196-5b29b6dd102e@lupinlodge.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 13:10:05 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <161884704906.8680.6192562844809236074@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Originating-IP: 35.208.206.246
X-SpamExperts-Domain: giowm1055.siteground.biz
X-SpamExperts-Username: 35.208.206.246
Authentication-Results: mailspamprotection.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=35.208.206.246@giowm1055.siteground.biz
X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham
X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.12)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Pt3MvcO5N4iKaDQ5O6lkdGlMVN6RH8bjRMzItlySaT/6vWonFxwAIdK7n3lMrYA8PUtbdvnXkggZ 3YnVId/Y5jcf0yeVQAvfjHznO7+bT5w7eqjV3umHXtZAfna397uT3Y6eSugsHMsWGw2POxshfUXy Uvr/ef/b2Eaz1j+xAOIG18GTzjJsSc7K2nOvm/XIETTZmou68uehA+IInhf6t7vDKRSeOy6sWF/5 dB1Kd4gzKQSavIsH4FUptcg4aK0N2VX+xIg0zhdLWAAqqCgWjSHoiUpUNz933vbajeziC6tOtugH ezOoM7SsjEENB+pA/PX59ioeNUCElTJyTs66vFC8Ir1AzF9KatNNAmmpgEzilbHtbFYVmmyNP/jz d7CCsVA5h60zvwN7iRldiarkCrcuKT09mK6Rp/QZAwz4lK2/GkI8YkeCnwt/dISYHzgDasd57qnG wTIHdxcV9COU82MrqSAO8/Y1hG2ZUPHyGBGcvNnJhWA+PBOgUcyC6ShzrpqDlHgb5Mo/Ztlo3PMg 2vkZGeWkX0gxbpPlxfRKbdYiZhRybGSIt89rB6jbCSm55ofS+sIMk8ycHFCSF658UIzIacMilJyG VyjpEgOg2D8kBBLwQfaaGL918KaJf/BXS8KWaecotq4zBypQ19eU2GxrlyZPzyn5edZSesYokAKI tBMasm7pZA/O6yBhF8ofxGP8GhEQ1f+yBicGv+yRcyJ7aK1gpIj2t1c9RTfYPopUKxkRsyUboi7c P7bYvbC13Ukc5FMpkpX3IxHQhZm5IGZTa+9+OSMXwPAg8aNYXju8Ksk+aedMfNWSnJswrtlNaJMB VSQPiiteHTBAOUz64AzevvA7ArqeQFEd2navgAlgcaP8dZAj5xCBjGUCfIafi2CriV/LwG2NVUpo NQ0dasCt012iWitKoZsyASvmMhsHKR/6Nm1CH0oswin/s6fYT+qq9Ao/4bbaocVTRylcBOuUvoyt FfxSX3soQthsOQ8ZJhmkUxqYPh8FC8zws1Bqahde7OuvYsgqpXktF3lGxY9ExRsEPo6cys3vnasQ nXMMLQaRvu/qUhWCf5pLfDl10z6bhalFEM/pjPCQA+BAli7zCvukckMSmeDWzLz0EQ4GGzgmrxJJ ssXyURBEIIDYaFozx0Kf/Y8lA3Ig6kSL40paFD1NH7/lRC3Td+MElitn5jS+KxNqou0RjCSsjgaS PAlbDjazCbhs7qBpykynMjE5uYhWkNyoKV8Ovpu0gzlqdv3mEpuuS0JcE5791cerE4eT9uqlngE+ ZUIM1/D1mMjpgIJ+boB/oLddZZ1CMgHejieXwuDtHmdhatH01VjlZUIF0rcnCxMHho65CLsbsGeu pYYdzPm7YfRDaULOU2kHPI/VbX7Xoc+NHoQNZ1fK6WbF+PY4xv+40y1Qv8bvmHh/CfNrQCM4XdfV mVPsv8Uc2eOmWKBjs81R88cYLO8A
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine1.mailspamprotection.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/J2p2tKKCwf4Dh6W9ZSeKfzAG_oo>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 23:29:07 -0700
Subject: Re: [Roll] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: (with COMMENT)
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, 18 Aug 2021 20:10:26 -0000

Hello Francesca,

Please excuse the unusually long delay it has taken for us to respond to 
your comments.

Regarding the following:

 >  Francesca Palombini No Objection
 > Comment (2021-04-19)

 > Thank you for the work on this document. I have some minor 
comments/questions below.

 > Francesca

 > 1. -----
 >
 > Section 2.
 >
 > FP: Thank you for this very extensive (and useful) terminology 
section. I would suggest to add a sentence to say that the reader is 
expected to be familiar with RFC 6550 terminology. Alternatively, it 
might be good to add terms defined there and used in this document, such 
as DODAG and DODAGID, into this section as well. It also might improve 
readability to add references to documents when appropriate (for 
example, DIO could reference RFC 6550).
The following paragraph was added to the Terminology section.

         <t>
         AODV-RPL reuses names for messages and data structures, including
         Rank, DODAG and DODAGID, as defined in RPL <xref 
target="RFC6550"/>.
         </t>
 >
 > 2. -----
 >
 >    to OrigNode.  Intermediate routers join the Paired DODAGs based on
 >    the Rank as calculated from the DIO message.  Henceforth in this
 >
 > FP: Please add a reference to where Rank is first defined, and/or add 
it to the terminology.

See above.

 >
 > 3. -----
 >
 >    Target Prefix / Address
 >       (variable-length field) An IPv6 destination address or prefix.
 >       The Prefix Length field contains the number of valid leading bits
 >       in the prefix.  The length of the field is the least number of
 >       octets that can contain all of the bits of the Prefix, in other
 >       words Floor((7+(Prefix Length))/8) octets.  The remaining bits in
 >
 > FP: "Floor((7+(Prefix Length))/8)" I am not sure where the "7+" comes 
from. Noting that the Prefix Length is 7-bit long, I am tempted to say 
that the number of octets calculated here also includes Prefix Length, 
however that is not clear from the sentence above ("The length of the 
field" - I assume the field refers to the Target Prefix / Address only). 
I think some clarification is necessary.

The "7+" was included to account for Prefix Lengths that are not an even
multiple of 8.  The "7+" increases the Floor calculation by 1 in such cases.
However, Eric Vyncke suggest using the Ceil() function, which is better:

OLD:
       The length of the field is the least number of
       octets that can contain all of the bits of the Prefix, in other
       words Floor((7+(Prefix Length))/8) octets.

NEW:
       The Target Prefix / Address field contains the least number of
       octets that can hold all of the bits of the Prefix, in other
       words Ceil(Prefix Length/8) octets.

Regards,
Charlie P.




On 4/19/2021 8:44 AM, Francesca Palombini via Datatracker wrote:
> Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl-10: No Objection
>
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
> introductory paragraph, however.)
>
>
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
>
>
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-aodv-rpl/
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Thank you for the work on this document. I have some minor comments/questions
> below.
>
> Francesca
>
> 1. -----
>
> Section 2.
>
> FP: Thank you for this very extensive (and useful) terminology section. I would
> suggest to add a sentence to say that the reader is expected to be familiar
> with RFC 6550 terminology. Alternatively, it might be good to add terms defined
> there and used in this document, such as DODAG and DODAGID, into this section
> as well. It also might improve readability to add references to documents when
> appropriate (for example, DIO could reference RFC 6550).
>
> 2. -----
>
>     to OrigNode.  Intermediate routers join the Paired DODAGs based on
>     the Rank as calculated from the DIO message.  Henceforth in this
>
> FP: Please add a reference to where Rank is first defined, and/or add it to the
> terminology.
>
> 3. -----
>
>     Target Prefix / Address
>        (variable-length field) An IPv6 destination address or prefix.
>        The Prefix Length field contains the number of valid leading bits
>        in the prefix.  The length of the field is the least number of
>        octets that can contain all of the bits of the Prefix, in other
>        words Floor((7+(Prefix Length))/8) octets.  The remaining bits in
>
> FP: "Floor((7+(Prefix Length))/8)" I am not sure where the "7+" comes from.
> Noting that the Prefix Length is 7-bit long, I am tempted to say that the
> number of octets calculated here also includes Prefix Length, however that is
> not clear from the sentence above ("The length of the field" - I assume the
> field refers to the Target Prefix / Address only). I think some clarification
> is necessary.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll