Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Tue, 28 June 2016 13:49 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 53DBB12B05A for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 06:49:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.947
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.947 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, 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
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 64rx2wHnoPwv for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 06:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83B13128B44 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 06:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2909; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1467121792; x=1468331392; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=cXdeUqJjF8vOLzCjdDO+QKGAvWi9stMsf1Fm8YZ/WhY=; b=HZrKvRqDhz9BfxmmxccAyuwHNoTTnxqXSuYHBTB2MVWLA0kKUZuoVZBi lywckUawwYCjTXZHwmXEFkPI7SrT5L/3wEEgkHE6Pb47QizWK0p/hVRd2 /IbeZ2BhRK3yF+zzdpSn4J4NhEAGFFJRuCpxaicexsdjTBT+CgmBGGMA1 o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AQAgAbgHJX/5xdJa1bgz6BUwa4G4IPg?= =?us-ascii?q?XuCYIM4AoEuOBQBAQEBAQEBZSeETAEBAQMBOj8FBwQCAQgRBAEBAR4JBzIUCQg?= =?us-ascii?q?CBA4FCBOIDQjDBgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARyGKIRNgSKCegqFdQWZA?= =?us-ascii?q?gGOMo8rb48PAR42gggcgUxuh2xFfwEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.26,541,1459814400"; d="scan'208";a="122709992"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Jun 2016 13:49:51 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (xch-aln-004.cisco.com [173.36.7.14]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u5SDnpSO009949 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 13:49:51 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-ALN-004.cisco.com (173.36.7.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 08:49:51 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 08:49:50 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter
Thread-Index: AQHRy9nVupFNWUgruE+yIgm4tP2235/9MbkggAIAyYD//7za4A==
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 13:49:48 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 13:48:55 +0000
Message-ID: <7887a2c930bd4eb3b90da72e2bbe914b@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <CAP+sJUdRQHJhuszRLmMLoObVVELTGKAboPZpjHRV1M1t3T1BpA@mail.gmail.com> <962ecd511f1b4629bcf329790509bb0c@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <17987.1467118035@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <17987.1467118035@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.228.216.20]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/OUzWe-_C9ybCk3E6LlghZ8wjrG4>
Cc: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
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: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 13:49:54 -0000

Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; wrote:
>    > Additional protocol elements to reduce source route headers in
>    > non-storing mode and/or memory consumption in storing mode such as
>    > route projection and BIER.

> It sounds too prescriptive, as if we have limited ourselves in the charter to those two methods.  I don't think that this is your intention.

Agreed, Michael. We can bar from " such as ..." on. 

Cheers,

Pascal


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roll [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: mardi 28 juin 2016 14:47
> To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>;
> Cc: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>;
> Subject: Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter
> 
> 
> Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; wrote:
>     > Additional protocol elements to reduce source route headers in
>     > non-storing mode and/or memory consumption in storing mode such as
>     > route projection and BIER.
> 
> It sounds too prescriptive, as if we have limited ourselves in the charter to those
> two methods.  I don't think that this is your intention.
> 
> If you wrote:
> 
>     > Additional protocol elements to reduce source route headers in
>     > non-storing mode and/or memory consumption in storing mode.
>     > These elements may leverage mechanisms such as route projection and
> BIER.
> 
> would be clearer that these are not the only two admissible methods.
> I'm not sure that we need to say what the methods are *at all*
> 
>     > There is a wide scope of application areas for LLNs, including
>     > industrial monitoring, building automation (HVAC, lighting, access
>     > control, fire), connected homes, health care, environmental monitoring,
>     > urban sensor networks (e.g. Smart Grid), asset tracking.  The Working
>     > Group focuses on routing solutions for a subset of these: connected
>     > home, building and urban sensor networks for which routing requirements
>     > have been specified. These application-specific routing requirement
>     > documents were used for protocol design.
> 
>     > The Working Group focuses on IPv6 routing architectural framework for
>     > these application scenarios. The Framework will take into consideration
>     > various aspects including high reliability in the presence of time
>     > varying loss characteristics and connectivity while permitting
>     > low-power operation with very modest memory and CPU pressure in
>     > networks potentially comprising a very large number (several thousands)
>     > of nodes.
> 
> I'd like these two paragraphs removed as being ancient motherhood text.
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>;, Sandelman Software Works  -=
> IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
>