Re: [Roll] Deprecating DCO status

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Thu, 29 October 2020 11:25 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.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 2EBE33A0B5B; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 04:25:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.598 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=iwRJO4eL; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=rv68rkfW
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 6ym5MqLnMx8S; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 04:25:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C4B43A1100; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 04:24:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3626; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1603970651; x=1605180251; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=jpposJfe/CM5oefysc56AV4v1pbShay656dBE15cN8s=; b=iwRJO4eLOgONaKJmm9g9H6c78iIa5BPNzD+k/BMmuujb+OyBKe7WUBCT qgiDrZB1/MFUSO14cDtB2fZMCYizifpKdWYRZEA/FaSc8EgLevsdi6DvS jkIzDwDM+DdKlzS5kJ6Z943PEZ4z2ot/SzbjmMM8vJkDZ/VNxE10zXUeL g=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3ABKXtZh/tKUZ3rv9uRHGN82YQeigqvan1NQcJ65?= =?us-ascii?q?0hzqhDabmn44+7ZRCN6vBkjVuPVoLeuLpIiOvT5qbnX2FIoZOMq2sLf5EEUR?= =?us-ascii?q?gZwd4XkAotDI/gawX7IffmYjZ8EJFEU1lorH6+OElRXs35Yg6arni79zVHHB?= =?us-ascii?q?L5OEJ8Lfj0HYiHicOx2qiy9pTfbh8OiiC6ZOZ5LQ69qkPascxFjA=3D=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DyAQABpZpf/5tdJa1iHQEBAQEJARI?= =?us-ascii?q?BBQUBQIE+BQELAYFRUQdwWS8tCoQzg0kDjUmBAokOjmuCUwNVCwEBAQ0BASU?= =?us-ascii?q?IAgQBAYRKAheBbwIlNwYOAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQYEbYVhDIVyAQEBAQIBEhE?= =?us-ascii?q?RDAEBNwEECwIBCBgCAiYCAgIfERUQAgQOBSKDBAGCSwMOIAEDC6NqAoE7iGh?= =?us-ascii?q?2gTKDBAEBBYUwDQuCEAMGgQ4qAYJxgmFOQoJMhAsbgUE/gREnHIIYNT6CGkI?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQIBhHMzgiyTID6TH5BIVAqCbIkIjGqFEAMfgxeeTpVBiHmCbY4phDACBAI?= =?us-ascii?q?EBQIOAQEFgWokgVdwFWUBgj5QFwINjh+DcYUUhUR0AjYCBgEJAQEDCXyMOwG?= =?us-ascii?q?BEAEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,429,1596499200"; d="scan'208";a="596037796"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 29 Oct 2020 11:24:08 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 09TBO2Dd027637 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 29 Oct 2020 11:24:07 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 06:24:03 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 06:24:03 -0500
Received: from NAM10-BN7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 06:24:03 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=emLzNKla5Qpu0J+qU70DpOyLKyIcwTT3BPmB1tUp50IRIeWUMIl1yP3eHuqOusZrmmTLHSlFZRTaQ35L8pp8d3DyxhIIl8dN0MPl1k8qi5Dx00dNIxkbjmbd3LzuASH9p6zMJRhH89XxLDh+qLNh+O6ic+NqWyX2AhsCSPkNUI0l+S117dS/J0vMVdVlJuoKE4ZKpRMSdUtBccUTVsbToHE5s1wVEjZp4hR28hTJrCWYQ46XHkrePomIXl4TQY1H+QCxG60FFEuKA6/x2Dvkd0KJF+03KLLGSd8zZzkS4o1mdbv9dt3/MtB1wIXEWBKGollFmw8pGKDV0yOIU6tIfQ==
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=jpposJfe/CM5oefysc56AV4v1pbShay656dBE15cN8s=; b=AebdpMWHfgmaAeBALJmOT+o1utA/Qj7ND4HFYEsjshL6vj0DvtL1a0PRl3gFGLMs3m9SxJlXpkDOsg8CqxPRPNbb+MhxaM4mdtLLp9XnEJ0pcifWl2jMFgmZfu1WROzyrghN52Z7TgZlbfa4sdt6E+LwfJbmBGcHShDj61dHL/bZipFLdwPerx/gUhL/ALmCrE3VmY5qxqx7YpLSg5N17lEZHtJS1QAdyorg46NQuyinhq4SF5f0C3aKjHDLXM3R7/TOM6qdfELr+ONSE8ZVTfEX+7JSbU9jv3EExVkn2HkAwDMzpZeFX1s5M09+p/cJ89iZnjjZscIxXx6GjUvrrg==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=jpposJfe/CM5oefysc56AV4v1pbShay656dBE15cN8s=; b=rv68rkfWvB4vHsOGwffZ0rgKp8/IZi05Qvy4nm7h3Gwtxh73LRKpU9NHou3Jt9dsSfpImAWsz6PlAP1D/ag5Qihxezgh8CurntY51DWB8MwMhne0FS5Bjy1grlyZRm5Bnq9gG/HhlSQDWOIJI8Obqpyy5yMlWtvCXLRq12p09Zo=
Received: from CY4PR11MB1352.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:903:2a::23) by CY4PR11MB0072.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:910:76::27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3455.29; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 11:24:02 +0000
Received: from CY4PR11MB1352.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b9ef:c652:dd7c:318]) by CY4PR11MB1352.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::b9ef:c652:dd7c:318%8]) with mapi id 15.20.3477.028; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 11:24:02 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
CC: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, Pascal Thubert <pascal.thubert@gmail.com>, "roll-chairs@ietf.org" <roll-chairs@ietf.org>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Deprecating DCO status
Thread-Index: AdatCZyw7r2+jZrvQAKux3tM4YDw1wAHlCWAAASKdrAAANO5gAAA+EGAAADvIiAAA/mhgAADlvUAAB+uswAAAPv7gA==
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 11:24:02 +0000
Message-ID: <C1CBD088-CC97-4D67-AF17-44ACEE42EE48@cisco.com>
References: <CAO0Djp2YXH5YCTvxYoPULL_9VtxVBHfNatBj4ipYhi5VBJc51g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO0Djp2YXH5YCTvxYoPULL_9VtxVBHfNatBj4ipYhi5VBJc51g@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [81.185.160.86]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 0e1cb1ed-3e95-4723-1eb6-08d87bfd2355
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: CY4PR11MB0072:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <CY4PR11MB0072F03BDD1ACD439A35F60ED8140@CY4PR11MB0072.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: CwZwrdYtl3vyFMI1/U5OctRwIDGnrPpOP+IRyUPgQek/Jb4aZOOLdI0qhbXpA2+mJcRcPQlR508PO83qjkkGoSmy69yYBEopfXo7oLxOPaB4Twlc3PtKkZZGx9bhWAyUNWIFSf/SDv2AhJGGcyzzc4XN7GhB9W7A1P5cAEolRqp3shFrQRHysr7CpN5C715PtddbKFG02Rmap5xpc2h3sbsgVCrcKxEcBNvhiiUV+wChLBiTdw+81m2uozCIJtqmEINjoYQkWN6y9TzsllmqiSEsd2nPJd7eIZnx10qt1xtprMr4e1Lm+cIuX5ApKu4oZco9XU3pyGqrD/ebvQHq+78lY/mBcdBird4Zp23AKbsbNY5uW803DJehtAuDzLK9cJjbPb0bmXE2XvcLHK8SXg==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:CY4PR11MB1352.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(376002)(136003)(346002)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(6506007)(36756003)(966005)(478600001)(54906003)(83380400001)(2616005)(186003)(86362001)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(66446008)(7116003)(8936002)(91956017)(33656002)(76116006)(316002)(8676002)(2906002)(66946007)(66574015)(5660300002)(71200400001)(26005)(6486002)(6512007)(4326008)(3480700007)(6916009); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <C3B6F6FF467EE14FA6C75CE1867D9268@cisco.onmicrosoft.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: CY4PR11MB1352.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0e1cb1ed-3e95-4723-1eb6-08d87bfd2355
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Oct 2020 11:24:02.2318 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: WhbrftnMG9rIYgUnlvmzSK3qjliTdTU6b9ZIRR+QL+NLvmlFyI5vMTGiffI0endFBeRAyou2ij9I5RaWCd9mcA==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY4PR11MB0072
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/MbwbDgzSfs0za93AJ53feR2XbZg>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Deprecating DCO status
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: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 11:25:26 -0000

Yes Rahul, 

This is how I suggest we do.

Keep safe !

Pascal

> Le 29 oct. 2020 à 11:55, Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
> I am not sure if I understand it correctly.
> Is the proposal to update the IANA registry for "no routing entry"
> value by NPDAO? That is, I should keep the IANA section in NPDAO but
> mention it is an update to (not create of) the registry and keep a
> reference to unaware leaves?
> Does this also mean that there will be an update to Section 12.5 of
> Unaware leaves?
> 
> Regards,
> Rahul
> 
> 
>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 at 01:18, Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
>> <pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Let’s do this !
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Pascal
>> 
>> Le 28 oct. 2020 à 19:05, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> a écrit :
>> 
>> 
>> Ok…if the registry is created by unaware-leaves, and the “no routing entry” value is added by npdao, we should be ok.
>> 
>> Alvaro.
>> 
>> On October 28, 2020 at 12:22:09 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) (pthubert@cisco.com) wrote:
>> 
>> Hello Rahul
>> 
>>> Thanks, Pascal, Alvaro for the edits.
>>> 
>>> @Pascal Thubert, Regarding "('E' flag set and 'A' flag not set)", this may
>>> confuse the reader and also may not be relevant for this spec since it is ok for
>>> an implementer to simply use 0/1 as a Status value without the understanding
>>> of E/A flags in unaware-leaves. Can we skip that part since anyways we are
>>> referencing unaware-leaves?
>> 
>> RFC 6550 specifies that values >= 128 are rejection. The 'E' flag is backward compatible. The reason why I mention it is that DCO has a normative ref to unuaware leaves, so it needs to implement the new RPL Status, meaning that it needs to indicates the setting of the 'E' and 'A' flags for each status it defines.
>> 
>> My question to you is whether DCO status code 1 was a rejection or not. If it was a rejection, then the RPL Status value per RFC 6550 should have been 129; in the new format it is 1 again, but with the 'E' flag set. This si what https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-roll-unaware-leaves-22#section-12.5 assumes.
>> 
>> If it is a warning, then a value of 1 is OK but still I'd mention the E and A flags for completeness, both set to 0.
>> If so then the IANA declaration in unaware-leaves has to change.
>> 
>> I tend to think that I should remove
>> 
>> | 1 | No routing-entry for the | [EFFICIENT-NPDAO] |
>> | | indicated Target found |
>> 
>> From the initialization of the IANA section and let you define it as a new entry in the registry in DCO.
>> 
>> What do you all think?
>> 
>> Pascal