IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Unaware-leaves - ND-Status and RPL-Status linkage

Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com> Sat, 28 December 2019 07:06 UTC

Return-Path: <rahul.ietf@gmail.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 670FD120074 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 23:06:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 G4xdEbbdtisC for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 23:06:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD02F120059 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 23:06:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id 203so22025667lfa.12 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 23:06:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=4zCK6U3SoWwDlRoKrNd2fQZOqINsLKUSDwUBb6tTsKA=; b=dupg8XIwK+R6kPhrRRU7u4O5Ga9T5DnMOcrYzVJdmy1Zfi+qDbqzjb9FadwhRW8oZL Fsr4Nsto/pTNSCBqAwhQpHm1JMDya23EgBZ4w3j3ULe9EF/Tlh/iSrpjMGEhrrMitxqG kyGg/PCxYuV0OS3k+jWZ3bj5JlRajpXln0YOiTZsqhwds+7wWNouuXqqGc5ARWjFWgEg horEx6YKlQwRmXHzaUqN/wIF5euwXiGwTGTxZ87r1ofuDbHfnKqYbRMRmkveluaU1Lyn BMXr//WzgFKiA7UH5fQRodODs26tNCSypnLSnjSt2tLYCABWf1zJstxPWfsxFgp7XA9r ClUQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=4zCK6U3SoWwDlRoKrNd2fQZOqINsLKUSDwUBb6tTsKA=; b=S1KKK6U2LVtekIAqMj+XLEh3gcdQIXSr4kXRHapyJI/+O9oyZm6o/68n2NBE7dLjrl NcvNMVYwLkEmEwcPtKw1sgCdLgH+hcC3b5NMDdm/avNPT2PYV0+CEL7yP6IUJHMpvbDE KvoTG86NbwWK3oc1A7OzdRqRNo+AXnD9XgVx3lTheJnNghnx1tOwCcpsa7YfkbBMnw7R wBdfoLtCsogPFBzj8DhgLGbaPwigNOErGXXDCLe0j7wRiJujHJa7P0pMRILr2IZwEklO 1TSNcIL1SKtOdBXi4cXdrgei0UMWj27F/3arTp4+hdSDsxI2nEJH2vg6UshFbVcPJsoQ IZcg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWTqGNiiaD6iqVS2+QUq7HaV9PzfLh3+m9QtxhGWT6/a/DKAzs+ tbnMOWy5Lkt5hWpw+hl+LKBZcKfLK/22vXsUVDHy5A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwmpfD3xDT0Z/rm+cspLJfmI1B8+WvZGjPh6P20K7qKmb5fY3trmLy7AhH2gyMfeEGDX2j1fPBuglpUv9ISIP0=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4a89:: with SMTP id l9mr30952626lfp.121.1577516800828; Fri, 27 Dec 2019 23:06:40 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAO0Djp1K18CGXv+YC9H4qgCgyH=fkon4ihFAUmgfKwdYQy38dQ@mail.gmail.com> <MN2PR11MB35657EDC8F8FBF9EB5359A57D85B0@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <25979.1576604888@localhost> <MN2PR11MB356572131554810FF88AC01ED8500@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CAO0Djp0XEM+h366FhOA5BtCGaa+R=aLz2CJyUSysPKMrJG9gnA@mail.gmail.com> <9584.1577428097@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <9584.1577428097@localhost>
From: Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 12:36:29 +0530
Message-ID: <CAO0Djp1HqK9k4n9GRbAhotFRXhHtOhhSpHYnms0b6NsorCtDUw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/UrSyH8kwjtKdsqs2WR7lzh5fWqk>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Unaware-leaves - ND-Status and RPL-Status linkage
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <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: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 07:06:44 -0000

On Fri, 27 Dec 2019 at 11:58, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>
>
> Rahul Jadhav <rahul.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>     >> > > You mean that we could change the ND status to 6-bits in the 6lo
>     >> WG?  > (I would have parsed ND status as being someing 6man takes care
>     >> of)
>     >>
>     >> Yes, or mandate that the 64 first Status values are reserved for stuff
>     >> that could be carried in RPL
>     >>
>
>     RJ> Wondering how such a mandate would work. IF we do it this way,
>     RJ> future extensions to ND ARO status need to consider whether they are
>     RJ> applicable to RPL and define accordingly. This implies familiarity in
>     RJ> 6lo/6MAN with RPL.
>
>     > I prefer the other approach where we restrict the ND ARO status to
>     > 64bits itself. Anyways using 128 bits in the future seems far-fetched
>     > (as indicated by Pascal before). But to limit ND ARO status to 64bits
>     > we need to convince the 6lo/6MAN group that "because of RPL" we need to
>     > reduce the size. I am not sure if this is easy to digest!
>
> I thought that we had 6-bits to store 64-values, while ND has 8-bits to store
> 256 values.  Please correct me if I mis-understood.
>

[RJ] Currently ND has 8bits to store 256 values ... RPL needs to carry
the same 8-bits but currently it has space only for 6-bits in RPL
Status field. But as of now only few values of ND status has been used
and using up 256 values (or for that matter 64 values) seem
far-stretched.
Thus one of the opinions is to limit the ND status to 64-bits and
carry as-is in the RPL status.

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status