Re: [Roll] AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experimental?
"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 19 August 2019 09:49 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 BA4D2120045 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 02:49:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-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=SzNDit1B; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=S6/CDcgK
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 JA-JUQET4G98 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 02:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9035D12001B for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 02:49:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=9586; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1566208146; x=1567417746; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=ZOSOlkRKisiao2Xqnmy5X9X63BtlttxzQaoeWg4Kopw=; b=SzNDit1BWs3HVpi0Nch0Mn0/dEte9mRhHxnYdOTJFPcJVEyZU85vFinS 8x3k06qI+umPrO1LlxhFgsZhDhyUrOg4p1eYNrId+oj2ykZZEkT15wMI2 k+VB1mc1Aov4ed5jaFOc46Ijuby/KXjoOMCCjcqpZzmR7nvaO0GHzEjR/ o=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:QtYO6Re3whSeseXqtiRssLg0lGMj4e+mNxMJ6pchl7NFe7ii+JKnJkHE+PFxlwGQD57D5adCjOzb++D7VGoM7IzJkUhKcYcEFnpnwd4TgxRmBceEDUPhK/u/dzA6Ac5PTkNN9HCgOk8TE8H7NBXf
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AJAADOb1pd/4cNJK1kGgEBAQEBAgEBAQEHAgEBAQGBUwUBAQEBCwGBFS9QA21VIAQLKoQfg0cDhFKGJk2CD5MLhFqBLhSBEANUCQEBAQwBASMKAgEBhD8CF4MLIzQJDgIFAQEEAQEDAQYEbYUnDIVKAQEBAQMSEQoTAQE4DwIBCBEEAQErAgICMB0IAgQTCBqDAYEdTQMdAQIMnggCgTiIYXOBMoJ6AQEFgTIBg00YghQDBoE0AYRzhnUXgUA/gRFGgh4uPoJhAQECAYEmKBIrgl4ygiaPFYUPiQKOLwkCgh2GaIcPhl2YRJU8kCkCBAIEBQIOAQEFgVA4gVhwFYMngkIMF4NPhRSFP3IBAYEnjGEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,403,1559520000"; d="scan'208,217";a="309405350"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 19 Aug 2019 09:49:04 +0000
Received: from xch-rcd-011.cisco.com (xch-rcd-011.cisco.com [173.37.102.21]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x7J9n4xx015931 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:49:04 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by XCH-RCD-011.cisco.com (173.37.102.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 04:49:03 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 05:49:02 -0400
Received: from NAM05-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-001.cisco.com (64.101.210.228) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 05:49:02 -0400
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=eflCMLQMZU+gB2CRjgsX528GebP2cREWa3KOGfw4Z9i6NPCPu8Iz+opHYlewjrIEdtIMBH8NvsQoiyE3yqJaCNXr1WQ9ioja5vlT7fJUzbZO4GixbvnAkAOo4YB5o0If1kwAvM+Y11npQNqTNe7qRbGPW+NXzZ+roaDPcyNmlWsJni7NsVO48q9nsGxXgJpIV9U4/BaECwnaFnsWMLUMTtM1muNU5+jJ9pXXw0b9eLcDg3Z0IG5IwHmxNSgwBWtVebYVeh9YRM0LnrbkKK3z3/BXmzYg/2UDiTn7O+uMSnf3vvR5/VUvozQuRoKBlMBBb1c1vQJTXQYm01iv9MPGuw==
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=ZOSOlkRKisiao2Xqnmy5X9X63BtlttxzQaoeWg4Kopw=; b=axRDrcF2Y9D9V7QMKQClyUpxc+jDnL+gT9X+0nBwc6fpDqP15Pnb1Nhc+dyhFhP8z2eLnGKTM/NE31/nigNNVbPBTkpBS7QBzB31CtYd4VT576mPHIF5kxOF09ZmH1H8onEncdOMaYdPghELH/7zaJ1LLtVyKjGwwjBRJwEKg71AHFa3PpeuA0buYDLZRO1aumsQCOvBGy+9W/ffNOwmFtynAtFU5eF3vwAY44PAlAVHkyHI1xW4hmSe7yR485/58C9ZlhZhwGJcooOIxMRE/oG8fZDTQGosVQVpE9S8BlWw5jvsg290eiA96owbKSblPd+WABoMv1FEJOq+p6P2mQ==
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=ZOSOlkRKisiao2Xqnmy5X9X63BtlttxzQaoeWg4Kopw=; b=S6/CDcgKfoBQ3SwCHDHIdk86AiIdR0wxpujMc2Q2wCruIKMMSYM4fnrnE+PZ9fb7RBsrZcvY1OOS56aFWn/uJAbK1pDDzwm79PZvYguEtSd3gwsheoNyHSpSAC/kZzNGT01pGdIebSHnHYw6DlIWpmcIgI+oa6yhtWvRmgol3fI=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.250.159) by MN2PR11MB4512.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.38.28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2178.18; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:49:01 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::89cf:9d:8a75:266e]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::89cf:9d:8a75:266e%3]) with mapi id 15.20.2178.018; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:49:01 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experimental?
Thread-Index: AQHVUsSMpciQkiOqPEygDuHUTjTpd6cCP8dg
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:33 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:48:09 +0000
Message-ID: <MN2PR11MB356510E471E6418A08F141DDD8A80@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAP+sJUeQLRL=riFn3KJJ0iicbTf9D7u3z6JGnjR6C9cjabacDg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP+sJUeQLRL=riFn3KJJ0iicbTf9D7u3z6JGnjR6C9cjabacDg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pthubert@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:44f3:1300:8170:98a7:7988:d19d]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 9345df4c-7a48-4c57-ee36-08d7248a76df
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MN2PR11MB4512;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4512:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 5
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB4512C787AE5FB4040FBEBFFFD8A80@MN2PR11MB4512.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0134AD334F
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(346002)(136003)(39860400002)(366004)(376002)(199004)(189003)(966005)(256004)(14444005)(486006)(99286004)(55016002)(33656002)(86362001)(102836004)(6246003)(9686003)(74316002)(5660300002)(186003)(54896002)(52536014)(6436002)(6306002)(53546011)(6506007)(6916009)(7696005)(25786009)(2906002)(76176011)(236005)(53936002)(446003)(7736002)(476003)(229853002)(790700001)(6116002)(11346002)(46003)(316002)(6666004)(606006)(8936002)(478600001)(76116006)(66446008)(71190400001)(66556008)(64756008)(71200400001)(66946007)(8676002)(81156014)(81166006)(14454004)(66574012)(66476007); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4512; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 9mX2NPEa/izZezR/hBqdbMf5k5hrX84wW5NPQSXYO88bZfuGGnVxkfIG/T67pbaenH0K8mK/AdHJnvlSaOV8wi+1cdtEh/RkszAYhfkF3HeNRXHs692Xr4RHAsqahzt/qk0HjD0XOWku5rYyxRgAJJ+JoEesr3QPRLHoZi+ueMp3lHuY6S49lyv+/4vQaZu/jnr8hQZF/noMe2hfFUKyU7WvgaVQEM26Y7waR/NRvilN/XVFHmxr8B20RJr05ApJSKwOUqhW5WKQ6/qfNmlxGRW1urcl0bHRQP2bKxNKV5Ht/CiKc36DhnCvzGug4fLMAEMGoiHu1pPN9coGs5aH4JFdtlghwcbJNRzd2+NOJ//cWZRRsgQKE1ebE7gIBq+UanG7dA4DaAxGzdwGmJLwnPVmHi0kdLh3zOlikMO36Is=
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MN2PR11MB356510E471E6418A08F141DDD8A80MN2PR11MB3565namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 9345df4c-7a48-4c57-ee36-08d7248a76df
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Aug 2019 09:49:01.3379 (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: SFof57Z+PFRWUbf9yR2Uc+3pBPGtO7YkPrDO1iSWRxLVHJt3594cIwzaulbmQfIobNiS9O0Hg602Ivwqg8RoFw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4512
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.21, xch-rcd-011.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/MxvbSiYk2cVJ7d3I1NrAuuwz5oE>
Subject: Re: [Roll] AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experimental?
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: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 09:49:09 -0000
Hello Ines: Relaunching in this call since you did not get an answer. For my part I’m not aware of any return from implementation and thus of commitments for deployment of AODV-RPL. I’d like to hear something different from another party? All the best, Pascal From: Roll <roll-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Ines Robles Sent: mercredi 14 août 2019 19:19 To: roll <roll@ietf.org> Subject: [Roll] AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experimental? Dear all, We would like to know your opinion whether AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experimental Track. Source Ticket: https://trac.ietf.org/trac/roll/ticket/195 - Experimental draft description https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-4.2.1, Standard Track description https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-4.1 - The Experimental RFC 6997 describes an approach for Reactive Discovery of P2P Routes. AODV-RPL specifies an approach for reactive P2P route discovery mechanism for hop-by-hop and source routing. Should these two drafts be aligned as Experimental ones? RFC 6997 was made experimental because its deployment future was uncertain. The same may apply to AODV-RPL. When there are sure commitments for deployment of AODV-RPL, we should like to be informed. Thank you very much in advance, Ines and Peter.
- [Roll] AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experimenta… Ines Robles
- Re: [Roll] AODV-RPL should be Standard or Experim… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)