Re: [Roll] [dhcwg] MPL config draft (Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration-01.txt)

Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp> Fri, 11 July 2014 00:10 UTC

Return-Path: <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDF1D1A0168; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:10:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.994
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.994 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, HELO_EQ_JP=1.244, HOST_EQ_JP=1.265, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
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 OrwlzVNDnOI6; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:10:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imx12.toshiba.co.jp (imx12.toshiba.co.jp [61.202.160.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD93B1A0123; Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:10:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from arc11.toshiba.co.jp ([133.199.90.127]) by imx12.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id s6B0ANf1025672; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:10:23 +0900 (JST)
Received: (from root@localhost) by arc11.toshiba.co.jp id s6B0ANFR017263; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:10:23 +0900 (JST)
Received: from ovp11.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.90.148] by arc11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id KAA17260; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:10:23 +0900
Received: from mx.toshiba.co.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ovp11.toshiba.co.jp with ESMTP id s6B0AMkL029277; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:10:23 +0900 (JST)
Received: from spiffy21.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp by toshiba.co.jp id s6B0AMf2024245; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:10:22 +0900 (JST)
Received: from [133.199.147.10] (ivpn-7-10.mobile.toshiba.co.jp [133.199.147.10]) by spiffy21.isl.rdc.toshiba.co.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74B5E97D1C; Fri, 11 Jul 2014 09:10:22 +0900 (JST)
Message-ID: <53BE21E8.60007@toshiba.co.jp>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 14:17:28 +0900
From: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>, Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com>
References: <20140701155803.14047.81610.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <53BA92D9.3000606@toshiba.co.jp> <CAL10_BqyWcb9_NBq2RzX7oX9g356ypYYDntVASX53q_D7Lrhdg@mail.gmail.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B5E9CA7@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <53BBA43B.3080207@toshiba.co.jp> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B5EC66C@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E1B5EC66C@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/V2mgVKmVCAG8_R0xckP-1GbcFFg
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [dhcwg] MPL config draft (Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-mpl-parameter-configuration-01.txt)
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
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: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 00:10:48 -0000

Hi Bernie,

(2014-07-09 5:59), Bernie Volz (volz) wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I don't have a great answer for you as I have no idea what the
> typical usages are likely to be. If there are likely to be many
> instances and the desire to configure most of the values (and for
> multiple domains), then one single option for each domain with all
> of the values is certainly a better idea.

Thanks, I'll add some note to describe expected use case. The options
are likely to be used as a set and I think open single option is easier
to implement.

> I think the main points here are to: - avoid compressing the data /
> developing new data types and use more standard elements (i.e., 16
> or 32-bit integers) - see RFC 7227. - group things logically (i.e.,
> alignment of the data, while making the picture easier to draw, is
> not a requirement [of course we assume it is octet (byte) aligned]).

I agree. In addition, I noticed 8bit common exponent (in other words, 
unit time of timers) for all timers will be much much simpler.

> There are many ways to format this data, each with pros and cons.
> Making those tradeoffs is something I am not in a good position to
> help you with.

Your comments are very helpful for me, thanks!

Regards,

Yusuke