Re: [Roll] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Fri, 11 September 2020 05:42 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 940EB3A1443; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 22:42:33 -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=dJqwpNWK; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=y2HRsrD9
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 24vqRY2nvIiE; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 22:42:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA03F3A1442; Thu, 10 Sep 2020 22:42:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3630; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1599802951; x=1601012551; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=zOwVgudWFHW/6/BfReVyDut33+XSqpBGhCid110JC84=; b=dJqwpNWKBGJ00cHh3nMIRFxS/L0m1/kx45BGA+5GHqrpteFoo3JQeerR WVbMozPTFCuLxTKQEmL/5/Fy+/1C33T4nzJpt0QHdWEH99y0UqGa3+tAQ VshyPGT+fvE8IzU7vAciTK0BU3qSi7ONvhmZRqYV+Ry/GWZHUlSMLdFB4 U=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AYuFDSBy0eoH/jcvXCy+N+z0EezQntrPoPwUc9p?= =?us-ascii?q?sgjfdUf7+++4j5ZRWDt/pohV7NG47c7qEMh+nXtvXmXmoNqdaEvWsZeZNBHx?= =?us-ascii?q?kClY0NngMmDcLEbC+zLPPjYyEgWsgXUlhj8iK0NEFUHID1YFiB6nG35CQZTx?= =?us-ascii?q?P4Mwc9L+/pG4nU2sKw0e36+5DabwhSwjSnZrYnJxStpgKXvc4T0oY=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0C/AQDUDFtf/4cNJK1fDg4BAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?HAQESAQEEBAEBQIE+BAEBCwGBUVEHgUkvLAqBJYMJg0YDjUwmhSiTSYJTA1U?= =?us-ascii?q?LAQEBDQEBLQIEAQEPhDwCF4IGAiQ3Bg4CAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBgRthVwMhXI?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAgESEREMAQE3AQQLAgEIGAICJgICAjAVEAIEDgUigwSCTAMOIAEDqEk?= =?us-ascii?q?CgTmIYXaBMoMBAQEFhR4YghAJgQ4qAYJwglxLQoZSG4FBP4ERJwwQgk0+hBs?= =?us-ascii?q?BASCDFzOCLY9ggwcBPKNYCoJlmjcDHoMJjyaOLpRCmSsYhCkCBAIEBQIOAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?FgWokgVdwFWUBgj5QFwINjh83gzqKGD50NwIGAQkBAQMJfI0JAYEQAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.76,414,1592870400"; d="scan'208";a="554155696"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 11 Sep 2020 05:42:29 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (xch-rcd-005.cisco.com [173.37.102.15]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 08B5gTVF017060 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 11 Sep 2020 05:42:29 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:42:29 -0500
Received: from xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) by xhs-aln-002.cisco.com (173.37.135.119) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:42:29 -0500
Received: from NAM04-DM6-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; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 00:42:29 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=E7rHZ/zzMxB5bZ0DA5WpsOkQ/jbvBUCrwZrroXDrTXYRyDRLEYRTEd4m62I87aFJ9+3HWuzvWMH8pxe63jenEmVWUCx9LXsFgxSxypWCMl3jM4OzVYluEfxmT7W/VUO3tJaiNsGR+J/Ah/iIbR5WtwoF5O1DBpsXfBt8Kjh5t5x+VxtgdV9MtpmN7BXXiIszk/HUx/JGrz0ltBKH9HV8qOf3ol/evz4PrkQfOkU2x8yxKJmaHVTply8GjIwJPpc8rc3gvKq8cOA7GbkTDMr8KcaIIHzh+LL6tmDb1pEqGS99IrnPFT4DKsAv9MUlaJKeHWbRdDxXv0il5hFRgfKlEQ==
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=zOwVgudWFHW/6/BfReVyDut33+XSqpBGhCid110JC84=; b=boRzo7CKu+lUFqX5C2i7XpbcG1XTIAYh3EkmnyLXP9OjmrVrCJS++1c33TV+fwJ/hFZ6CwL2GKRpYLgq3tvr+2YALMGjox6FOJ+ec6XLgL0pBOjiXxTx3LF2CFqO57+FpMLNaK20cNfNEMjc0L3QsImWprNOLT1/pb0tIiVfaNXgMHIrvOC6Fr6n8y8B7hXFFpIWC33OAqL6hMBSzva2n7V1dN7tNZOqHyPyu7htGz7NknDSV3w4tcspTZ+w0tCVsb/rLrq5GoWNl0PfJ4dPQ4H7N+yK+ba46jnJSdWJIiBK01i44SFXvIs9mZ93MYhC24StQeQbKzjRgk0FdUc8Ow==
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=zOwVgudWFHW/6/BfReVyDut33+XSqpBGhCid110JC84=; b=y2HRsrD9llNZgOtbQKe7mumwjPwg8vuNQkJES0XJTHjLSftRtuBbc4zErwHgbyhlT29lN4RzaFjmtXlOi0reMOymM0kNcx/P0c1HtYb+Fpe6FC2jTXLyzkkl4Fu/liNmb2rmuP1xM2s+v7HZHdQaHnOf0H0gZ5xYnbWYZEHdcWg=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:ea::31) by MN2PR11MB3821.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:f7::24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3370.16; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 05:42:28 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::119:f851:5860:da95]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::119:f851:5860:da95%4]) with mapi id 15.20.3370.017; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 05:42:28 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
CC: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@yahoo.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "roll@ietf.org" <roll@ietf.org>, "roll-chairs@ietf.org" <roll-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138@ietf.org>, Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
Thread-Topic: Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHWhvbDFnz+ZxCN2kqfSLm4/QQEM6lhafFggADkOACAAA4zgIAAAueAgACPedU=
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 05:42:28 +0000
Message-ID: <8CD8472F-B8C0-4396-8223-1AECF7FE0CB1@cisco.com>
References: <159968972884.1065.3876077471852624744@ietfa.amsl.com> <MN2PR11MB35659A0710E687A7C9995E6ED8270@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <20200910200744.GE89563@kduck.mit.edu> <CAMMESsx_Tgbn6VUHmbmzbLeVOxa5Uiw44GyRQK0m+_8NgQBT-Q@mail.gmail.com>, <20200910210857.GI89563@kduck.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20200910210857.GI89563@kduck.mit.edu>
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: [90.118.154.54]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: b95888fb-fc15-4e56-1907-08d85615780d
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3821:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB382160CA1E3DD999716C841ED8240@MN2PR11MB3821.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: otwDsaxl8CO1eXYZmHarINGR4z4pbhKP+wLsXVoBrEXrIREZp5JUHOh2ZLc22ouH/jxzByj76dR9ruwG4+wO6z3vsCOud1Qwwt5VWzq7sk62/8HheJNBHpSHHf2p8pqf9dC5vmFazNqACf2dnp3yx/5DJZAUNF68V42OBT0rMyAO8znYlx9L0dUDnIW2Av/ovRsY3am4pi3CTSQcOi9nT8b7sMk8Wm8MIu/qUr3PrzOINhACDedwSr0x2KM86m3nKCiGzLHwre3Cl+y6MgWR7kRD+vzO50o98dXyYrg/RlSSK5cq32gmDquWt15fzRD04uEApSOEP5IAqo90wNCfHA==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(366004)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(376002)(346002)(64756008)(66946007)(6486002)(186003)(33656002)(478600001)(316002)(2616005)(54906003)(8676002)(83380400001)(6916009)(66476007)(66446008)(6506007)(8936002)(91956017)(5660300002)(66574015)(66556008)(2906002)(76116006)(71200400001)(26005)(36756003)(4326008)(6512007)(86362001); 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-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: b95888fb-fc15-4e56-1907-08d85615780d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Sep 2020 05:42:28.0132 (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: YUfk1rFZgz70X3hK4XhpqWaDoeoWH0V6r3xopmBTiYPRVIv0xnKZkgUT5hgvmaFnuyTxi2H28JAmYgUU5nFW5g==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3821
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.15, xch-rcd-005.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/OBkcQ_C4ZR1allD-fPAhQiAetb0>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
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: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 05:42:34 -0000

Hello Benjamin 

There might be a misunderstanding here.

The current text is good to this respect -we only define the flag for MOP<7) and this is the product of Alvaro’s work with us. I believe we all agree on that goal.

What we decided not to do for MOP 7 is to start doing IANA work and split the registry. The reason is that the current registry applies to all existing mops and 7 does not exist. If 7 or later reuses the flags then that will be the time for IANA work.

The tricky piece is what we code now for MOP 7 so it can be reused in the future. The point is that this is a transition technique so we need to align the default to the world after the transition. 

My reading of the argument on the table is the subtle question of updating RFC 6550. I read that the time bomb  on a Flag is a change in RPL’s way and that it would justify the claim that this is effectively an update.

I tend to agree with this. If Alvaro agrees too then I MHO we could resolve the issue by restoring the update signal, is that right?

I’ll answer your other point in your longer mail.

Many thanks for caring!!!

Pascal

> Le 10 sept. 2020 à 23:09, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> a écrit :
> 
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 04:58:33PM -0400, Alvaro Retana wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> Jumping in here on the Updates/MOP 7 point.
>> 
>> 
>> The only reason we’re trying to treat MOP 7 differently is because we (the
>> WG) know that the mopex draft is coming…which is the future document that
>> will define what 7 really means.
>> 
>> However, we’re still not there…and the mopex draft should be the one
>> defining all the changes.
>> 
>> I think the easiest thing to do at this point is to ignore mopex, and the
>> knowledge that things will change in the future…because we still don’t know
>> exactly what that future will be…this extension should then simply be
>> defined as other extensions have been: applicable to all MOPs.  When mopex
>> comes we can deal with the respective Updates, changes to the registries,
>> etc.
> 
> That seems like it's setting us up for exactly the situation that
> Pascal/Michael want to avoid -- if we allocate the T flag "normally" then
> an implementation written next month will treat the bit in position 2 as
> the T flag, independnetly of the MOP value.  When MOP==7 finally comes
> along then the bit is burned and can't be repurposed, so long as that
> implementation is still deployed, and that can't be fixed by Updates or
> registry changes.
> 
> Is it so bad to say that the bit allocation is only defined for a subset of
> MOPs?
> 
> -Ben