IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] some comments on draft-thubert-dao-projection-00.txt

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 06 July 2015 08:36 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
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 DD1321A908E for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 01:36:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 qVJMS5Hu6u9L for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 01:36:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-7.cisco.com (alln-iport-7.cisco.com [173.37.142.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 006671A90EC for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 01:36:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1459; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1436171775; x=1437381375; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=sybHDRk9nczCI6UKAjuyQ4yIvIPjbYn61KALXKJ0bgc=; b=FGwPiM36ONmUfkf/U8UMgHLP5MhVoZC/UuiOMLk57cQ7evU6QYhCTN36 Nzthsg9hzn8yA3vjQRM0q6sJVMPs/woM8WTd6J4hTmINDVOdUwQGKe/dS MgvbHpphS63JGMm3Z6swUwCAleXp1UFNW5UAlln1MpgTQ+QBFJSA/XEGN Q=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DMAwBbPZpV/5FdJa1cgxKBNAa9TgmEMYM0AoEpOBQBAQEBAQEBgQqEIwEBAQQ6SwQCAQgRBAEBCxQJBzIUCQgCBBMIiCfIEAEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBGItLhDceOAaDEYEUBZQVAYtomFUmg3tvgUeBBAEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,413,1432598400"; d="scan'208";a="165711525"
Received: from rcdn-core-9.cisco.com ([173.37.93.145]) by alln-iport-7.cisco.com with ESMTP; 06 Jul 2015 08:36:14 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com [173.36.12.78]) by rcdn-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t668aEtV005370 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 08:36:14 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([169.254.1.136]) by xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com ([173.36.12.78]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 6 Jul 2015 03:36:14 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] some comments on draft-thubert-dao-projection-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQtl4uhnM3ZZux4UKM8k7V/iC9hJ3Lwz3sgAIjXACAADXbMA==
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:36:13 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 08:35:37 +0000
Message-ID: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD849EFEAFC@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <20150630063630.9499.53083.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD849EF25A0@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>, <10398.1436016852@sandelman.ca> <F2C95F1F-7DF2-497E-AFF5-0711565F400C@cisco.com> <26399.1436141254@sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <26399.1436141254@sandelman.ca>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.49.80.35]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/ccloikKARHnDGt7Hac2rcXN9VWA>
Subject: Re: [Roll] some comments on draft-thubert-dao-projection-00.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: <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: Mon, 06 Jul 2015 08:36:21 -0000

Hello Michael:

The draft indicates that the root knows some topological information from the non-storing DAO (it knows all about the DODAG).

Per RFC 6550, a path constructed by storing-mode DAO messages is directional, packets flow parent to child,  and we do not want to introduce confusion by changing any of that.
Thus the segment that is constructed from the segment egress to the ingress. 

It results that the segment is directional but not that it is necessarily flowing down the DADOG, this depends on how much information is available to the root or whatever PCE is used as a helper.

Cheers,

Pascal

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roll [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
> Sent: lundi 6 juillet 2015 02:08
> To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks
> Subject: Re: [Roll] some comments on draft-thubert-dao-projection-00.txt
> 
> 
> > It would be good to make it clear which direction one counts the
> "segment"
> > to know which one is last.  I don't like "segment" here, I think it's
> > a routing path...  Could you define segment if you think it's the most
> > natural term to use.
> > (There are also some articles like "the" missing in places, btw)
> 
> I also realized yesterday that 6554/RH3, uses the term segment.
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software
> Works  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email