Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop
John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net> Tue, 23 October 2012 12:40 UTC
Return-Path: <jdrake@juniper.net>
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 7F49021F86C0 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.130, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, UNRESOLVED_TEMPLATE=3.132]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7EXoLt-XGPNQ for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og119.obsmtp.com (exprod7og119.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DCCC21F86BD for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob119.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUIaQVWaAhU1TBJ1M1AHMonqhg7iXEjto@postini.com; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:40:55 PDT
Received: from P-CLDFE01-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.59) by P-EMHUB02-HQ.jnpr.net (172.24.192.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.213.0; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:40:05 -0700
Received: from o365mail.juniper.net (207.17.137.149) by o365mail.juniper.net (172.24.192.59) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:40:04 -0700
Received: from ch1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (216.32.181.186) by o365mail.juniper.net (207.17.137.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 05:42:15 -0700
Received: from mail91-ch1-R.bigfish.com (10.43.68.232) by CH1EHSOBE011.bigfish.com (10.43.70.61) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.225.23; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:03 +0000
Received: from mail91-ch1 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail91-ch1-R.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8813A601A7 for <roll@ietf.org.FOPE.CONNECTOR.OVERRIDE>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:157.56.244.213; KIP:(null); UIP:(null); (null); H:CH1PRD0510HT002.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; R:internal; EFV:INT
X-SpamScore: -23
X-BigFish: PS-23(zz98dI9371I542M1432Idcamzz1202h1d1ah1d2ahzz1033IL17326ah8275dhz2dh2a8h668h839h944hd25hf0ah107ah1220h1288h12a5h12a9h12bdh137ah13b6h1441h1504h1155h)
Received: from mail91-ch1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail91-ch1 (MessageSwitch) id 1350996002323461_5643; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from CH1EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (snatpool2.int.messaging.microsoft.com [10.43.68.232]) by mail91-ch1.bigfish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CB264007B; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from CH1PRD0510HT002.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (157.56.244.213) by CH1EHSMHS025.bigfish.com (10.43.70.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.225.23; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:02 +0000
Received: from CH1PRD0510MB356.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([169.254.2.153]) by CH1PRD0510HT002.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.255.150.37]) with mapi id 14.16.0224.004; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:01 +0000
From: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>, "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "roll@ietf.org" <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop
Thread-Index: Ac2xEy0n78zttzpFSgOnw7I7S2GAIwAA16iw
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:01 +0000
Message-ID: <0182DEA5604B3A44A2EE61F3EE3ED69E07DDE577@CH1PRD0510MB356.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD8221DD3F6@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD8221DD3F6@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [66.129.224.53]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%0$Dn%*$RO%0$TLS%0$FQDN%$TlsDn%
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%12219$Dn%CISCO.COM$RO%2$TLS%5$FQDN%onpremiseedge-1018244.customer.frontbridge.com$TlsDn%o365mail.juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%12219$Dn%OLDDOG.CO.UK$RO%2$TLS%5$FQDN%onpremiseedge-1018244.customer.frontbridge.com$TlsDn%o365mail.juniper.net
X-FOPE-CONNECTOR: Id%12219$Dn%IETF.ORG$RO%2$TLS%5$FQDN%onpremiseedge-1018244.customer.frontbridge.com$TlsDn%o365mail.juniper.net
Subject: Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 23 Oct 2012 12:40:56 -0000
Right, once explained in the proper context the proposal makes perfect sense. Yours irrespectively, John > -----Original Message----- > From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) [mailto:pthubert@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 4:41 AM > To: John E Drake; adrian@olddog.co.uk; roll@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop > > Hi: > > <I answered to John from my phone but then realized that I did not copy > the list.> > > In short: The packets carried within an instance share a characteristic > which the OF optimizes for. > The OF determines a RPL topology and thus how the flow that is tagged > with that instance is processed in the network. > For flows to be processed differently one may different instances. > > Considering how open the definition of flow in 2460 is, this fits. > > The rank stretches that a bit since it qualifies where the flow is in > the Network. > Then again RFC 2460 is open enough not to bar anything. > > Rather, the spirit is for us to do something useful with this field in > the forwarding plane and that is exactly what this proposal is doing . > > Cheers, > > Pascal > > > -----Original Message----- > From: John E Drake [mailto:jdrake@juniper.net] > Sent: lundi 22 octobre 2012 21:15 > To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert); adrian@olddog.co.uk; roll@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop > > Pascal, > > So the information that you are carrying in the IPv6 label field has > nothing to do with IPv6 labels? So, why is this not an egregious hack? > > Yours irrespectively, > > John > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > > Of Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > > Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 2:30 PM > > To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; roll@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop > > > > Adrian, > > > > This draft is not mpls. This draft is about carrying the RPL info > > (rank, instance, flags) in the flow label as opposed to the HbH which > > incurs additional header + eventually tunneling. > > My other draft on fragment forwarding has a lot more to do with label > > switching since the first fragment lays a label that the other > > fragments follow. But then we are not using the flow label but a > > 6LoWPAN datagram identifier tag. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Pascal > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf > > Of Adrian Farrel > > Sent: samedi 20 octobre 2012 21:37 > > To: roll@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop > > > > Speaking as an individual and without an implementation... > > > > Isn't this MPLS? > > Hasn't the routing area looked at the idea of using the IPv6 flow > > label for labelled forwarding more than once in the past? > > Hasn't the conclusion always been that you could do it, but you would > > have to be sure that you were not overloading the field? > > And hasn't the resulting discussion led to a debate on the value of > > label stacks and the impracticality of label stacks using the flow > > label? > > > > Cheers, > > Adrian > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf > > > Of Philip Levis > > > Sent: 20 October 2012 14:50 > > > To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > > > Cc: roll@ietf.org > > > Subject: Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2012, at 1:19 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote: > > > > > > > Phil; > > > > > > > > There is indeed lot of pressure for this in terms of header sizes > > > > and energy > > > consumption in the *real world*. > > > > > > I'm personally concerned about header sizes and energy consumption > > > in The Matrix. Because I don't live in the real world. Oh, wait, > > > sorry, > > I > > > do. Can you > > walk > > > me through the quantitative reasoning that a few bytes of header > > > will increase energy consumption? It the belief that it will lead > to > > > sub-packet > > fragmentation in > > > some non-amortized sense? Generally speaking, in low power wireless > > > networks, energy consumption is dominated by idle listening and > > > communication latency/interval support, not the length of packets. > > > Of course there is a > > spectrum > > > of low power approaches and their point on that spectrum. Are you > > > thinking of one in particular? > > > > > > Could implementers who are encountering this pressure comment? I'm > a > > > sucker for and easily swayed by quantitative data as well as > > > first-hand rather than second-hand reports. > > > > > > > And there is no hack in the proposed solution. > > > > Simply we believe more in practical engineering and ML > discussions > > > > than we > > > trust in crystal balls. > > > > > > *coughs politely* I believe in very practical engineering that > > > considers long > > term > > > consequences. Solving a problem a certain way now might cause > > > significant problems in the future. I agree this is a tradeoff -- > in > > > my personal opinion, > > nothing > > > more, the tradeoff on this one is 100% clear. > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > Philip Levis > > > President, Kumu Networks > > > Associate Professor, Stanford University > > > http://csl.stanford.edu/~pal > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Roll mailing list > > > Roll@ietf.org > > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Roll mailing list > > Roll@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll > > _______________________________________________ > > Roll mailing list > > Roll@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll > >
- [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by hop Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Owen Kirby
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… John E Drake
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… John E Drake
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Ralph Droms
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… John E Drake
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] using the flow label instead of hop by… Philip Levis