Re: [Roll] NSA PS-set metric/constraint

Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis <> Fri, 06 March 2020 17:39 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3E1D3A0BDB for <>; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:39:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=M5OAAK1r; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.b=OI3xqaCh
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sZkjLUEkwjGy for <>; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:39:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 860893A0BD3 for <>; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:39:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A81171F99 for <>; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 18:38:58 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20160819-nLV10XS2; t=1583516338; bh=ZwXYKJdB8jK75x9X1NvETZiETI7kmGDght7GgFXvQi4=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=M5OAAK1rb2cryhlORSoNfiIgDBy6aj/fSWhs13tJS7eaP5Pkqo3gRHplS1akpqFL7 0XDvz5WrqfMcdaQabayknoIl3iVUK06vrFIfZDencAPTbbfh74m4LGBwcbWbBAEvfj ah9XtE86uEqxvnbWU3dI4pE7ckJtIci5T8G4JvEf7scqF/j+mfITLYDEAjRt6YOyz6 invwe4fdTkB8l1KsDSfqquAKHC16QBkbIpEd6fk3UPnfBfKZ2JXiegHVUK9N3H+9W8 knPXu4agSEU2eP5qC6EsI1/zpJRfVtnpb2z1hT2U4mLn+3ycxqkqp6YoHcNPlNUqm/ BobJHsPgqdSyA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1583516338; s=20191001-wvim;;; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To:Cc:Content-Type; l=11380; bh=ZwXYKJdB8jK75x9X1NvETZiETI7kmGDght7GgFXvQi4=; b=OI3xqaCh3pnkENGkcxV0USq24B3t4mhePfxRdNqRtgIgjMeUawdG2Ryo/hyrEc3x 40O8EACeZNOaaxbUCqgElG4M0EO7IQhi1VfCFKrcyNiHWa/G2y7kPxauU8gurFBUlpT 6cbhCrQQ3rmi8THF4+WLefSpEvBojELMab9SaIFcs/L8vstHk6IgkHH9bu4jIULGqwX fJMiEtd+vHIEjfutakghrhHDefgLXu51NUgUf6uTn7fuKUObUgJEFaeuXWDKOrNKwJW L9TAjHF3UnUtFfYKQQ6tK0OPQ4ApwSe2RPN6lOnFgse9aK5I/gVcpTA/fOk3PFowrBV GukD0o0lhg==
Received: by with ESMTPA for <> ; Fri, 6 Mar 2020 18:38:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: by with SMTP id j69so2742868ila.11 for <>; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 09:38:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1P3rm5j0bczKfgPqJ1hprJXHOCVod5ARL1lZCwguPWJpRoC/yB cM/wQYwqiosCGCfKdHDFCDh3Xz/b5IfFPzlaBA0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuvho4dxRfMbGKwNuZGcE2fGGhO1MQ04LHu4MUifu3nE/e8MtR/09h3tBl82EIaeb1lUT+KoaTrd+5+PRdJLqU=
X-Received: by 2002:a92:86c6:: with SMTP id l67mr4306980ilh.225.1583516332368; Fri, 06 Mar 2020 09:38:52 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis <>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 18:38:56 +0100
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <>
Message-ID: <>
To: dominique barthel <>
Cc: "Georgios Z. Papadopoulos" <>, roll <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007cad7f05a0332067"
X-ContactOffice-Account: com:113819248
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Roll] NSA PS-set metric/constraint
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: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 17:39:04 -0000


Thanks, I'll update the draft then.


On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 5:37 PM <> wrote:

> Hello Aris,
> Thanks for pinging me, this had disappeared under the pile.
> > If I understand this correctly, a node reporting it's own parent set in
> the NSA will set P=1 basically to let the receiving nodes know that they
> should not expect to find inside all the metric along the whole path, but
> only a part of it, and in our case from just the sending node.
> > Am I getting this right?
> Exactly, this is what I had in mind. The recording along the path is
> partial (P), and it turns out to be exactly the one from the potential
> parent, which is all we need.
> So it's all totally inline with RFC6551: we don't need to create an
> exception to RFC6551.
> Best regards
> Dominique
> De : Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis <>
> Date : Friday 6 March 2020 16:58
> À : Dominique Barthel <>
> Cc : "Georgios Z. Papadopoulos" <>,
> "" <>
> Objet : Re: [Roll] NSA PS-set metric/constraint
> Hello Dominique,
> sorry to bother you in a probably very busy period.
> To finalise our draft before the cutoff, we're waiting for a brief answer
> from you on this previous question:
> On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 12:51 AM Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis <
>> wrote:
>> [DP] Alternate proposal:
>>> Could the PS be part of an NSA Metric? After all, it is used to help
>>> select which parent(s) are best suited for upward routing, not to prune
>>> downlink propagation of the DIO along a path that exceed some metric
>>> value. C=0, R=1, P=1 comes to mind for this metric.
>> [ARIS]
> So I read a bit more about this. So C=0 means "use as a routing metric",
>> OK.
>> R=1 means "use as a recorded metric", i.e. not aggregated, because
>> aggregated makes no sense, OK.
>> Now, P=1 means that one or more of the nodes on the path did not record
>> the metric. So, it's less a "command" and more a report of previous
>> behaviour.
>> My question is: it seems impossible that *all* the parent sets can be
>> recorded along the path due to size, so each node *replaces* the received
>> parent set with it's own.
>> We can specify this with text of course, but I have not seen another
>> existing metric that behaves like this.
>> On the other hand, the NSA metric object is not used a lot, and if it
>> makes sense for any metric to be replaced rather then appended to a list of
>> metrics, that metric would be NSA.
>> I am not sure about that P=1 part though and how it relates to replacing
>> the existing metrics.
>> If I understand this correctly, a node reporting it's own parent set in
>> the NSA will set P=1 basically to let the receiving nodes know that they
>> should not expect to find inside all the metric along the whole path, but
>> only a part of it, and in our case from just the sending node.
>> Am I getting this right?
> Best,
> Aris
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> 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.