IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] rpl routing and linux-kernel

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Thu, 19 July 2018 02:20 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 E8F17130DC1 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 PhEbUGmQur8d for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54DAE130E18 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 19:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600A72008C for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:36:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 584391A76; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:16:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55F811A54 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:16:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAO0Djp16_WUrKkbY-UQGdjLhO2gYitHQo=7iw4cn+fC_am5DdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO0Djp16_WUrKkbY-UQGdjLhO2gYitHQo=7iw4cn+fC_am5DdA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:16:00 -0400
Message-ID: <17294.1531966560@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/LD4DAnmNhNQFEg9fSm_3DRjMiWY>
Subject: Re: [Roll] rpl routing and linux-kernel
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
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: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 02:20:38 -0000

Hi, I'm not sure that the ROLL list is a good place for Linux-specific
implementation questions.  In particular, it seems that most implementers are
on monolithic embedded kernels (contiki, openwsn, etc.)

There are discussions on unstrung-workers@lists.sandelman.ca about Linux
kernel integration (none recently through).

Discussions also occur on linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org.
It would be a good place to start a new thread.

Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
    > Hello ROLL,

    > While trying to integrate RPL with linux kernel and we had certain
    > design choices. In that context I have some specific questions,
    > especially towards linux-kernel integration and not towards RPL
    > protocol implementation itself. Assuming RPL implementation will be in
    > userspace, questions are:

    > 1. We can add/del routes using rtnetlink interfaces ... this can be
    > used for the routes learnt by RPL as well ... But RPL needs to
    > maintain some additional per-route information on the 6LBR ... To be
    > very specific, we need to store parent information in context to every
    > route. Is it possible to do it with rtnetlink? I didn't find an option
    > to do that. If it ain't possible then what could be an alt approach?

    > 2. RPL requires that certain extended ipv6 options be added in data
    > flows .. What is the best way to do this? It is possible to do this
    > with netfilter+libnfq but i m not sure whether this is the best
    > approach.

    > If there is anyone who tried this before, it would be great to have a
    > discussion in person while we are in IETF102. Please let know if you
    > are available for discussion.

    > Thanks,
    > Rahul

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

-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email