Re: [Roll] turnon-8138 review

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <> Mon, 08 July 2019 08:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAE2812012B; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 01:09:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.489
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=Vs7a1MYJ; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.b=sWj5JrxY
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7g4VtDI4WnLN; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 01:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6008C120121; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 01:09:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=14008; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1562573355; x=1563782955; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=DIDgaFKaHnIJ4+MWirnWpLRzLcdNU5vEUYTF++6uqws=; b=Vs7a1MYJD2lxtW4GkLBYGuc+lOeziRJ32BJ7Udfxv3ZWMipwiEfUWeyP GqCbK27Rx2EFQ4NFgJ9FC4T4S7o0RWHSJ/FN4imEIp4qbYk6byrztJuz3 FaCucg6xd5qM9dm/s4Bvk7BmKIUb9xeVRv5k4JVuhacdA+nEHsg1Ph9Ev M=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:euJ5DR9bTLu+V/9uRHGN82YQeigqvan1NQcJ650hzqhDabmn44+8ZR7E/fs4iljPUM2b8P9Ch+fM+4HYEW0bqdfk0jgZdYBUERoMiMEYhQslVdaZCVDxIeT2Ryc7B89FElRi+iLzPA==
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,466,1557187200"; d="scan'208,217";a="292646556"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 08 Jul 2019 08:09:13 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x6889DBW027808 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 8 Jul 2019 08:09:13 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 03:09:12 -0500
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 03:09:11 -0500
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 04:09:10 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=DIDgaFKaHnIJ4+MWirnWpLRzLcdNU5vEUYTF++6uqws=; b=sWj5JrxYVaQpOHYeZnPRFZ3KvCI0kaV8fnJKsXiTao5blHA0E13nm3DtME3OcbD5GfOhi4VryLLzwaYyjc/TSu96nD0CgXchyezcvtGtlMGuXqgzOikCpqTgh9VYuPgKEFlTofKjNj99wUc4yoBAdNOT/ySAULNdcUbpdf3iAJ4=
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2052.18; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 07:53:17 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::1ce9:1582:146c:c50a]) by ([fe80::1ce9:1582:146c:c50a%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2052.020; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 07:53:17 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>, "Li Zhao (liz3)" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: turnon-8138 review
Thread-Index: AdU1IIlA6w1MYnH1Rd6eOKlcXhIIwAAUkYsAABBZ5FAAFT9BQA==
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2019 07:53:04 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 07:52:10 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 643d71c0-1b72-4536-1103-08d703795681
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MN2PR11MB3646;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3646:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 6
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 00922518D8
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(366004)(346002)(376002)(136003)(396003)(39860400002)(199004)(189003)(81166006)(53936002)(8936002)(81156014)(7736002)(8676002)(14454004)(74316002)(55016002)(9686003)(54896002)(6306002)(236005)(6246003)(73956011)(76116006)(66446008)(64756008)(66556008)(3846002)(2501003)(52536014)(26005)(66946007)(66476007)(6116002)(102836004)(790700001)(76176011)(186003)(7696005)(53546011)(6506007)(99286004)(229853002)(6436002)(606006)(68736007)(110136005)(256004)(33656002)(25786009)(71190400001)(71200400001)(450100002)(66066001)(316002)(446003)(11346002)(966005)(478600001)(486006)(6666004)(5660300002)(2906002)(476003)(86362001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3646;; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: p5tWGn4SrHDIJGt3uJ4KUiVk8M0fo5sEFp8Mm07Pj3bex7I2XTtGfF2CazXBjgPaN3yKKZaRBpGdSfaN/hZSgSOv24V1vm0gQfvuzraZrhgPsfkpN+wTYgvscvEWq3TVf09rV0h0ZHFHMNiv+Ip1Fnk8XSwornPOzgW8+yloW8Sk72XyNAVM+C9OhgA/kYS9ktqyGNzhNljZ7R4wm/E6PA7cNzMggT5sOaiovvMxc6AHTVhmeiNdWVfrMC+oo2wMzykHcEn0Q9diagAATW07KMTv/wYIXT/4+v3MkHm+qPyIInwd5iTugoUyIHuLEJdIJ+0nCFCZfyyDRnmprIywWa5CbRhAJUy5yuXEztjMWeIFP74ztcqSgBO2DYdhgPw1b9fq60mNLr0uut0AvMZBM+zz8hokNKL5IANeyKzG1eU=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MN2PR11MB356558B27CD21719EDA18653D8F60MN2PR11MB3565namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 643d71c0-1b72-4536-1103-08d703795681
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 Jul 2019 07:53:17.2610 (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-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3646
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Roll] turnon-8138 review
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2019 08:09:18 -0000

Dear all:

Many thanks to Rahul for his excellent review : )

I agree with Rahul that we are not modifying RFC 8138 but complementing it. We’re back to the long discussion on what “updates” means. Trust me, you do not enter that discussion, it is really a grey zone and caused very long threads for not much outcome AFAIK. For now I’d rather leave it as is because when people implement RFC 8138 it’s good that the RFC header points at this draft so the implementer implements them together. Note that chose the same and passed IESG review with it.

I also agree that using MOP-ext is the way to go, and we’d need a flag from the device to indicate in which setting it is operating. Note that this creates a normative dependency => this draft cannot ship before MOP-ext. Note also that this is a “current setting” flag as opposed to a “capability” flag, so it would be good to enlarge a bit the wording in MOP-ext to cover that form of usage.

For the IP in IP, I agree it’s good to clarify. I provided text in on how that happens. We can reference it in the next version of this draft. I placed similar text in annex of the RUL draft, see I’ll try to push a fix today.

All the best,


From: Roll <> On Behalf Of Rahul Arvind Jadhav
Sent: lundi 8 juillet 2019 04:26
To: Li Zhao (liz3) <>;
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
Subject: Re: [Roll] turnon-8138 review

Thanks Zhao, Please find my comment inline.

Section 5.4. “Rolling Back”, says, the administrator SHOULD make sure that all nodes have converged to the “T” flag reset before allowing nodes that do not support the compression in the network.
[RJ] How would a root know that all the nodes have accepted the T-reset? Doesn't this require use of capability flag ? Also I’m not sure if the same capability flag used before can be used here?
[LZ]Yes. This requires use of  capability flag. I think there is no capability flag before to identify the T-reset. One option is using reserving flag in DAO base object. Another option is leveraging draft-rahul-roll-mop-ext<>
[RJ] the point I wanted to convey is, you may need two flags if rolling back needs to be supported. Flag1 is Supports8138. Flag2 is Enabled8138. For rolling back and for nodes supporting 8138, these nodes need to inform the root with Enabled8138=0 and Supports8138=1 flag.
Secondly, the option you mentioned of using DAO base object for such flags may not be correct. These are target specific flags and a DAO object might carry multiple targets.