IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Eliding mechanism in 6550

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 30 September 2019 03:47 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 81AD81200FE for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 20:47:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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=hzDswt1r; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=FYl+Fq7X
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 hWJ7B1ErX-A9 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 20:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1427120019 for <roll@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 20:47:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1890; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1569815223; x=1571024823; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=j7wOzcb9xwiwH4dIL/DRH8P73ajaUmlJgoQpY7uIVtE=; b=hzDswt1r3zdN4UotR3yGgVHHGgjZY3+sGJubcE9RPL3m0AGvkDqb9Um9 zxD87bus81Y9OcLb5YqBVI4LTl+tkwJsfmH1SxiKQfYIXrnG8CyAy4+Md KFC2LzrjekohdDQ74Dv+ohPDqskpSkMhtEq8eS2F7ikDnDi0uf60QAHH1 E=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:jHQlnxe1pYEvzADFShc5MmV8lGMj4e+mNxMJ6pchl7NFe7ii+JKnJkHE+PFxlwGQD57D5adCjOzb++D7VGoM7IzJkUhKcYcEFnpnwd4TgxRmBceEDUPhK/u/dzA6Ac5PTkNN9HCgOk8TE8H7NBXf
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0B1AABueZFd/4gNJK1mHAEBAQQBAQwEAQGBVAYBAQsBgUpQA21WIAQLKgqEGINHA4pXTYFqJZd2gS6BJANUCQEBAQwBARgLCgIBAYFMgnQCF4MgIzUIDgIDCQEBBAEBAQIBBQRthS0MhUsBAQEBAgEBARAREQwBASwMBAsCAQgYAgImAgICJQsVEAIEEyKCewQBAYFqAw4PAQIBC6A+AoE4iGF1gTKCfQEBBYJJgjYYghcDBoEMKAGMDRiBQD+BOAwTgkw+gmEBAYFhgwsygiaMdIJpnT4KgiKVCxuZNqdAAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFTATYNgUtwFTsqAYJBUBAUgU4JGoNPhRSFP3SBKY5CAYEiAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,565,1559520000"; d="scan'208";a="551460806"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 30 Sep 2019 03:47:02 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (xch-rcd-012.cisco.com [173.37.102.22]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x8U3l2AW026312 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 03:47:02 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by XCH-RCD-012.cisco.com (173.37.102.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 22:47:02 -0500
Received: from xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 22:47:01 -0500
Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (64.101.32.56) by xhs-rtp-002.cisco.com (64.101.210.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 29 Sep 2019 23:47:01 -0400
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=jMgzx9wTlKT+vHBCYPFYfrHQbZfX7ugYZShkKBvZ0XcPOFJTjNVVIgnN4hAPlPvVQrXeqWYR03o3LdB/0Ahj/YYLAMvl9CzR6Oyd49HrFRLExJbEw9nuDMkt3enFsW+UAIr+oU/hmSQ85EvE7O/TLv2WoxbtSKDmiYk1M/YlB1XUBLF1w1sl4CXCGUEktF3/orsk8zPX+b5O7KqVt47ZsVuz1Bvk1TucNVRt9HmQn4C0ueUE9oQfJQEIdCI0qtVHU5+RyID5Br1r0Wet+eRyLFBnVhxVIGp8SdchOXJlyhkqytLVo7ZEHlIhsEzyXPWuy7mVXfP1QSijwnWUiN9Hsw==
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=j7wOzcb9xwiwH4dIL/DRH8P73ajaUmlJgoQpY7uIVtE=; b=em4s3IhSNz9IrJxjsuZHAq1HA5efuvN3Z4zM2akKsPSug3PphrmWLK8gLA4xrW76tjOS3q8r7rllWouY4/VUChqnoGo1Hd3gQXOM6bQpB0nVuDPbCMDBVNK2SJquDztT8xSXqhIiLxfL7eZmuyrPaX3Fu+dB5a5ZEol2L4Js00Y9Z9S8BH0g3rJi7BASY2lUh0aniC0/ga6K9JUeXekJgZBzC6lndPizCSitlZXN++rT9qgazauTATv/wl0Ff0ilHDDCt0RONAUyYr3dXjmWn3N5hvRKspvg7LS3u6Om55N5y+9bxVoTb9NcdNgefrRv6/hgV7OImCIJHKOlgzlqdw==
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=j7wOzcb9xwiwH4dIL/DRH8P73ajaUmlJgoQpY7uIVtE=; b=FYl+Fq7X9B7ccBnjsDvIW+Zr1QDjbW4qOXEpxHouZbwqSrJT0+WX0CZWxe+hpkp62nIrFqBjlNNz9ScZ1hUEuhj6AMSF9Av39uZn6MG8hW5aokubQLgeJRPD6lsgjogCWny532svYwUduV3G5L0ygAbb8WAEEVmBPkAMB9gYdJw=
Received: from BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.206.75) by BYAPR11MB3830.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.239.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2305.20; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 03:47:00 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::50b5:6d21:bb95:8b23]) by BYAPR11MB3558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::50b5:6d21:bb95:8b23%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2305.017; Mon, 30 Sep 2019 03:47:00 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] Eliding mechanism in 6550
Thread-Index: AQHVdxWYTfJkX2vtREOJsDxTaX1EB6dDlT6A
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 03:47:00 +0000
Message-ID: <5DBFE23C-9388-4FF3-949C-13846F68AF7C@cisco.com>
References: <28599.1569796250@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <28599.1569796250@localhost>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pthubert@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [93.23.107.43]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d86d05a0-9fb7-4558-213d-08d74558d983
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB3830:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB3830FCC5E2A8D413C49CD621D8820@BYAPR11MB3830.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 01762B0D64
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(136003)(376002)(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(346002)(199004)(189003)(6116002)(66574012)(14454004)(229853002)(25786009)(66066001)(486006)(86362001)(3846002)(6486002)(446003)(966005)(476003)(99286004)(6306002)(6512007)(6916009)(256004)(6436002)(11346002)(2616005)(14444005)(71190400001)(71200400001)(6246003)(478600001)(26005)(8936002)(66446008)(186003)(64756008)(5660300002)(102836004)(91956017)(76176011)(66556008)(66476007)(33656002)(66946007)(76116006)(7736002)(305945005)(2906002)(36756003)(8676002)(6506007)(81166006)(81156014)(316002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BYAPR11MB3830; H:BYAPR11MB3558.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: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: bqC7O1/CuLjMB7ieoUT3ZY58a5NpZvT6hTHBuibzsv45RT4TtixdzLt09sduzdXan3hFTWcB0lMRDl//cyo1EuOTbn6VexjocGD2Kcp+U8v28t659VfDB+ZflY/4or8ACQ4pAscTL7cW/epSWcPpC5E8jzdwRSDG7CKTEqlJYSDm0v6c1RjG3VLXNFvy0134TsIHYhY0o+h79sgq57SgN1CTgK57HGGXj8f2MkXE3ecRBNT6vDEtJBHekz6/nMbCy4KOZPobaGo0/5cFPzpHyGVxN0z4Yq4ZJG1klWNRjpPxAO/ydAAE7+Ol9BadzLpBDd0LTkJMn6QT6mGAay2XOWxx4bBwsc5waf6rp8JAzPtJGBDMxdD0DxPF6DkHPvM7Yqh821JMwsOs+atMnZTLXJJ5Zy/+k6gFVjc1+IVs+TKEHz0QV0ApHjUJlHJ+TNSHbbOpnnsV3ZL5Lrshti4MYA==
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <35C088EFDCCE264395C811E920C25F6E@cisco.onmicrosoft.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d86d05a0-9fb7-4558-213d-08d74558d983
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Sep 2019 03:47:00.3273 (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: v6rGLL7StN25c0QfEO1VFAgm8K8L8TWAAiTls06Dtk3vvMAFSwudeynLS1llIGdjhCT9ldKs7bX5Gci/fWhoMw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB3830
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.22, xch-rcd-012.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/NjDggoJoC_qiLnEiw6gQ1d4BIQI>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Eliding mechanism in 6550
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, 30 Sep 2019 03:47:06 -0000

I would not compress the identification of the message otherwise a FIO for another DODAG me be confused ...


Regards,

Pascal

> Le 30 sept. 2019 à 00:31, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> a écrit :
> 
> 
> Rahul Jadhav <nyrahul@outlook.com> wrote:
>> During the interim Pascal/Michael suggested the use of counter to track
>> the freshness of the Config Option. This could further extend to track
>> MOPex and CAP options freshness.
> 
>> The suggestion was to use the reserved bits in the base DIO message for such a counter.
> 
> Yup.
> 
>> I was wondering if the DODAGID in the DIO could also be elided under
>> the same guise? Basically the point is to elide all the "static"
>> information which rarely changes.
> 
>> Clearly this has issues in multi-DODAG networks but it is possible to
>> handle such issues. Considering that this directly results in 16 bytes
>> savings per DIO multicast message, do you think it is worth the effort
>> or if there are other issues?
> 
> My question is what are the sizes of the DIOs, and how close are we to
> fragmentation already?
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email