Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842DC5639@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 10:02:00 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <0FE1C6E1-EBA2-431D-A2DB-1C3874234827@tzi.org>
References: <CAH=LnKQDPf_-Tw7BODF03PKYkLXjLCSR9RAtd-x9-ha-c80Hrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <037472BD-E257-4561-8A07-988039DD4641@nestlabs.com>
 <CAMsDxWTHrgDLopT1Oz93xAuCyimAADmudBj71PTiHgCAj28CPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842DC5072@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
 <2992BA1F-147C-4652-B713-D2F31F45F74F@tzi.org>
 <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842DC5639@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/JucujuGXStF24lIzbI5XUU2e9rE
Cc: "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>,
 Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>,
 "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [6lo] [6tisch] Fwd: Comparison of 6lo-rpl drafts
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>

On 17 Sep 2014, at 09:48, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com> =
wrote:

> - 6MAN on whether we can avoid having to set and/or carry a field of =
randomized 20 bits in the LLN =20

Laudable, and completely unrelated to the hijacking.
(Not on critical path, anyway.)

> then eventually rewrite it for LLN purpose

Don=92t do that.

> - ROLL to decide whether to use a ROLL solution (based on FL is the =
only one on the table) or

The flow label is not ROLL=92s, so there is nothing to do here.

> wait for 6lo to deliver

ROLL has waited long enough for consensus to build in 6man around the =
flow label hijacking.
Not happening.

> - 6Lo to decide whether and how to compress the RPL option (3 =
proposals on the table)

I think we are converging quickly here.

Summary:

I=92m calling for all involved to stop muddying the water with the dead =
flow label hijacking proposal.
It is a distraction from the consensus that is being built around a 6lo =
solution, and it will never fly.

Gr=FC=DFe, Carsten