Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-enrollment-priority-09.txt

Hello Michael, all,

I just reviewed the draft (as it appears on GitHub today) and have three comments:
- size of the field DODAG_Size: it is specified to be 12 bits, but then there is a full paragraph which explains why DODAG_Size can only be a rough approximation. Would 4 bits for DODAG_Size be enough (accuracy to 8-12%)? That would save a full byte in the option. At a time when we try to compress IoT traffic, pretending the apparent entropy is those extra 8 bits is information sounds suboptimal
- Section 3.2 "Option Processing": the discussion about what a 6LR should do when it receives a DIO with the new option seems to pertain to DIOs received from a DODAG the 6LR is already part of. Should we say something about receiving DIOs from DODAGs the 6LR is currently not part of? Could the option be a reason to switch to another DODAG? In that case, should a 6LR maintain vl's for DODAGs it is currently not part of?
- the new option does not have a name. It is referred to as "the option", "this option" in the draft. I think it should be called something, and this something should be written in this draft. What could this something be? Min_Enrollment_Priority comes to mind, but there is also the DODAG size information. Any ideas?

Best regards

Dominique

-----Original Message-----
From: Roll [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Konrad Iwanicki
Sent: 24 May 2023 23:06
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Cc: roll@ietf.org; Huimin She <hushe@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-enrollment-priority-09.txt

Great. Good job! I have just corrected a few typos I noticed. You may want to double-check.

Best,
--
- Konrad Iwanicki.

On 24/05/2023 18:33, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> Konrad Iwanicki <iwanicki@mimuw.edu.pl> wrote:
>      > On 18/05/2023 20:03, Michael Richardson wrote:
>      >> Konrad Iwanicki <iwanicki@mimuw.edu.pl> wrote: > Should I go once more
>      >> over the draft?
>      >>
>      >> Sure, I need to do a top-to-bottom read-through myself.
> 
>      > I went through the entire draft a few times. It is definitely much
>      > clearer now. I did some more editing, though (mostly
>      > clarifications/reordering and minor copy-editing):
> 
>      > 
> https://github.com/roll-wg/draft-ietf-roll-enrollment-priority/pull/16
> 
> okay, merged, and I cleared/checked the other edits/pull requests.
> I will post a new version on Monday.
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>   -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-                      *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.