IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-13

Rahul Jadhav <nyrahul@outlook.com> Sat, 11 April 2020 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <nyrahul@outlook.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 87D1E3A1419 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 08:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=outlook.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 xhCsGhyZRVo3 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from APC01-SG2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092253026.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.253.26]) (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 70D393A141B for <roll@ietf.org>; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=E4NkKdLeVDXiQnnCUEtEpPLMp+nOEmjsht+L3d/llIi520oz6fx5kHmlhFnNZAqxy89Vr8Ua36p8LzKCS1/g66o/kfIlmRIcao3bdX9tbndSXZiaM27utE6EXeSsEBzBgDJFL/Xqh2IW8PbwjQwZhHTztlMkA7X7vaVLE15RS4tmUWD+/H3JbLug72vQoyraThwjF2SO9QX+gDTS0/MDUgwaHVnrWzfhbRDQ+MTprUUIZ1P2en3IxK16I6e+a2griqXM3MWxeEUZrXbEzjYZ5ocTErh3rFA7kb163LFn1fk2sslUcurF2oQVT5LT70HLpffqIaFdnih5AoePcnClgQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=YdGa/7B2g41M6VwwOjKXR7yi+x0W2wOyXxxSfDM3O3E=; b=astWMEJv0/EmLqNSALRdGhLS7/YHvAQZv90kSVTZGD3VijExcV+i/xjVwHxj+uYpFgZI4PuuqnkHrQbEM4QexGYer4gjkUQOkcCu9DhsCGDUhIPoDppSVHQDfQpFyolPNX1xz+y7e+Yig4Icp1WSANE0yzC9dbR4j1RMFLnLvlhulgT5UWqcgobpZ6JVlYYhO/JAirl9XusexNScEequErP7/voK++RCwS6hwN/B6+IyRDWeiqfQVySK2ALOoHKCbYh0AqLbvJJsDZojdla9CNdm1DAUxYlHLGoFumUYFDrVbA741eubltDZc9g2pxebLM3HQ3t1TtnJL2eWEa1U7A==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=none; dmarc=none; dkim=none; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outlook.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=YdGa/7B2g41M6VwwOjKXR7yi+x0W2wOyXxxSfDM3O3E=; b=cYz6mPne7ICQuxWMkgZx2aySNS85yhQH9jFQJ5EoLz4PsXLZL9dxuSmXiEPtpIgtx6cO4ZwnrEYS45ysHtpokt9vGKzN6a5EzU4kw0lNwwpDOqwQFGN9zyuqqcVXp0qaTBxZT5vFoDRuKwIuQRhxpYbz0J9+fduS09V3ZPZGMWvG8/xgz5Yx4z0BoRRnm3vrFyjE3UiZVNCgo2ZdP7DGcUp2w2Tjxsjo7kMsJy+pYts90BRPK33lMYBLmx86w7dhgQeG5Mv/ElyTnBVCWDKWd2egXUcbj2i4r8mW75RaWcX8ZwzhqQemrop8vAc+1ZpHD4onlksl5yy6kHUPn/3nBA==
Received: from HK2APC01FT007.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7ebc::46) by HK2APC01HT080.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (2a01:111:e400:7ebc::199) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2900.15; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:38:53 +0000
Received: from BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.152.248.58) by HK2APC01FT007.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.248.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2900.15 via Frontend Transport; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:38:53 +0000
Received: from BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::a1ff:5c53:dc37:c050]) by BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::a1ff:5c53:dc37:c050%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2900.026; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:38:53 +0000
From: Rahul Jadhav <nyrahul@outlook.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-13
Thread-Index: AQHWArx2ZeI9Kh0ubkafbrXVUnWzNqhtgIaAgAFY74CAAj1RgIABAuGAgAHl44CAAB7IKQ==
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:38:52 +0000
Message-ID: <BM1PR01MB40208D80481AD0AEC7F9746FA9DF0@BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <CAP+sJUe7oF74F96zi5RuE985CD9LzNfwad=Zzstc8uat2wc3aQ@mail.gmail.com> <25495_1585151124_5E7B7C94_25495_267_1_DAA13A41.7291B%dominique.barthel@orange.com> <CAP+sJUchX+q_cX4_fOytz+q5RfjN+L51VM-+Auz4jVxK-6wpOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAO0Djp1QGASEu4fasZD6K6CSD0q-7F+CD0_JOOppWnnABdbo5w@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB35650537494AB9FB8E0849D1D8C10@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAO0Djp1-SYaYGwpdBsUbK07_HPN=Had_MqJidXfPg1fBM4wHPg@mail.gmail.com>, <MN2PR11MB3565A72C53705EEF21DAD237D8DF0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN2PR11MB3565A72C53705EEF21DAD237D8DF0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-IN, en-US
Content-Language: en-IN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:5832D86052C1EEF910588F319B2F88D971421ACFA3EAF0B8A800A053A34F4EDF; UpperCasedChecksum:ADCCEE5EFEE039C4013FA5384FC7C76FE069F35E2719B58B433C91CB242751C4; SizeAsReceived:7385; Count:44
x-tmn: [xN9JljBzT8K0KbSSTl1HbZpvifdlDGAQ]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 44
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 24c4bf84-b78e-4d4c-ced1-08d7de2e704c
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HK2APC01HT080:
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: wTt2h39I7b5OKxQvSvxVXBlS1dNsCPBN2+DC2uY3tVpvLtgvDar8tQqELwMdrvB97DS8uyADl4513L0QCzFjLpCwek1tbLvHRlNbQ9DCiJBwxb0ltVkr462kEt5ROYu+US6JSL2BYaSoACJSOMvRmNH2MoFK8GVrzYvqxrhZ9bpvw3gWWyDEJfy6FG8wonbI
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:0; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BM1PR01MB4020.INDPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:; DIR:OUT; SFP:1901;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 7ohHBvVc44QAQ0FByKfw02k9K9OzhXm8WIj6Ceep0fgmRkpybgxRwLYGJG5qM7JL6tWWPrMh0USFKkrMLer3bIursBKH+W5jfeSaDpU+YFLmkSNB5fDgg1QfqODUR71KfzLAiELUHKuMq5rrgFpJEg==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BM1PR01MB40208D80481AD0AEC7F9746FA9DF0BM1PR01MB4020INDP_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 24c4bf84-b78e-4d4c-ced1-08d7de2e704c
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Apr 2020 15:38:52.9698 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HK2APC01HT080
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/FShaV4u1lQGSlkcV7V54RrH8gJ0>
Subject: Re: [Roll] WGLC on draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-13
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: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 15:38:58 -0000

I went through the diff and it seems ok to me. Thanks
Regarding ROVR, pls find my rsp inline.

>
> > 3) There is no mandate for using the ROVR in the target option. It is a SHOULD,
> should it be a MUST?
>
> [RJ] The ROVR will be a MUST only when a DAO for RUL is sent with a lifetime of
> zero by the 6LR. If this is what you mean then yes, I think it should be a MUST.

There will still be the case of a legacy node, to the Root will have to cope with no ROVR.
The text did not MUST on the termination because there is a proposed alternative of doing the EDAR exchange there.

SHOULD we MUST it all the time?

It is also useful to control the 6LBR, e.g., reduce the lifetime.
It is mostly protecting the future for more zerotrust security using the ROVR in RPL. We can work on that rapidly once the RUL work is complete. The cost is the extra bytes obviously.

[RJ] Sorry, but I am still not clear on the proposition here. Are you proposing that all the DAO target options MUST carry a ROVR field even in regular case? I understand that using ROVR might improve security in the future but the cost is high in my opinion.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email