Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics
Mischa Dohler <mischa.dohler@cttc.es> Thu, 29 September 2011 08:20 UTC
Return-Path: <mischa.dohler@cttc.es>
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 9E7E321F8CCD for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 01:20:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_62=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id flFsiHXFd3Lf for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 01:20:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Scorpius.cttc.es (scorpius.cttc.es [84.88.62.197]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAF0221F8C7A for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 01:20:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from castor (postfix@castor.cttc.es [84.88.62.196]) by Scorpius.cttc.es (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id p8T8NEbS001598 for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:23:24 +0200
Received: from [84.88.61.89] (pcmdohler.cttc.es [84.88.61.89]) by castor (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933472FC27B for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:23:14 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E842ADD.6080102@cttc.es>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:22:53 +0200
From: Mischa Dohler <mischa.dohler@cttc.es>
Organization: CTTC
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902 Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: roll@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (castor); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 10:23:14 +0200 (CEST)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 84.88.62.197
Subject: Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <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: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 08:20:50 -0000
Hi Panos and Theodore, I have gone through your updated draft http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zahariadis-roll-metrics-composition-01. It reads much better now and seems to have addressed the worries issued by Cedric and Pascal before. I personally fully second your findings on the need for composite routing metrics, facilitating in a sense some QoS framework over LLNs. I also like that you corroborate this by some theoretical framework on routing algebra (something coming a little too short in this WG so far). I would welcome however that you stated more clearly in the introduction that prior ROLL documents, notably - "draft-ietf-roll-minrank-hysteresis-of", - "draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics" and - "draft-ietf-rollof0" define objective functions composed of one metric, but that the recently issued -"draft-ietf-roll-applicability-ami-03" clearly states the need for using more than one to get practical deployments viably going. It would be great if you could attend an upcoming IETF meeting to make a case for your draft which I am sure the entire WG would greatly profit from. Thanks and kind regards, Mischa. ______________________________ Dr Mischa Dohler Head of [IQe], CTTC, Barcelona www.cttc.es/home/mdohler CTO Worldsensing, Barcelona www.worldsensing.com ______________________________ [Roll] ÎÏÎÏ: Re: FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics To: C Chauvenet <c.chauvenet at watteco.com> Subject: [Roll] ÎÏÎÏ: Re: FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics From: Panos Trakadas <trakadasp at yahoo.gr> Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2011 10:58:21 +0100 (BST) Cc: roll at ietf.org Delivered-to: roll at ietfa.amsl.com Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.gr; s=s1024; t=1312711102; bh=IrSOTHkbfzZvXGay1yO2e0qV/eZmu7SUJjND8edHlQM=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=2ceNeHNqjp/btN3PxxL9hJB4ur6UAxjs2o29plOP1kBVQ0UHPfg87kLGZixT0CrUAe1i9UIRbxGOnWTCkQd0Y4vcMNKApMXf+mQ8nNljjb+3KNf9XVnnmISFZMigc9kx8cU+tyihPbHJAG6+rewyKSQum9ELEbHWlPhtxwNH5uI= Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.gr; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Message-ID:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=iCTLwhCfA2uxW3g4CNUZ0qwyTTXtLlpEjymO1cCMBJ5+Iup3yd0U00rB49rVOjjpmAriZaEV51GHdhiMy8HbwcO4I/4uTl6kBr/4BOlfA7XMxPEFomo7XkVdFzNWaL/Kp/xL2KdbvtV3NbtfpXjNaX/F/HHL4tf4r3dBaQpI+yQ=; List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll> List-help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help> List-id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org> List-post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org> List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe> List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe> Hi Cedric, We will take into consideration your comments in the newer version of our draft. Furthermore, we are developing RPL for JSim simulation platform (hopefully it will be ready by mid August). We could benefit from this simulator towards many directions such as evaluation of several QoS composite metrics, experimentation with multiple application-specific instances, as well as accurate estimation on hysteresis threshold. Best regards, Theodore and Panos. From: C Chauvenet <c.chauvenet at watteco.com>; To: Panos Trakadas <trakadasp at yahoo.gr>; Cc: zahariad at teihal.gr <zahariad at teihal.gr>; roll at ietf.org <roll at ietf.org>; Subject: Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics Sent: Sat, Aug 6, 2011 2:29:35 PM Hi, See inline. Le 5 aoÃt 2011 Ã 01:58, Panos Trakadas a Ãcrit : > Dear Cedric, > > We believe that the definition of "order relation" is correct: the order relation is used by the OF to compare link/node weights along the path (equivalently, metric values) and select parent node. > > > [C.C] I Agree with your definition. > > As an example, consider the case where the ETX is aggregated along the traversed path. If node A receives DIO messages from nodes B and C (potential parents) with ETX values of 2.5 and 3.2, respectively, then the order relation will help selecting node B (advertising the minimum value of ETX) as the parent of node A. > In this concept, your comment is right; the order relation of LQL must be minimum (and not maximum). Please consider it as a typo. > > [C.C] OK > > > Regarding link-color comment: Apart from being used as a 10-bit flag field (e.g. for indicating the encrypted links, as described in rpl-metrics draft), link color may be used to indicate the number of nodes along the path transmitting at a specific radio channel; in this way interference can be reduced by selecting transmission in the "least occupied" channel. In this case, the order relation must be "minimum" and the domain is integer. > > [C.C] I think that the confusion is greatly due to the very wide range that the link color metric may cover. You example of the usage of this metric is interesting, but many others usage may be possible, and so an global order relation seems difficult to find for this metric. > > In general, we will re-format Table 1, following the metric description in rpl-metrics draft. Also, we will replace words "minimum"/"maximum" in the "order relation" column by "less-than" and "greater-than" in accordance to the order relation definition. > > [C.C] I agree that it would increase the readability. > > Before submitting this draft, there was a discussion on whether we should include examples and formulas in this initial version of the document; it seems that our decision was wrong... We will be happy to include examples and formulas to improve readability of this draft. > > [C.C] Nice. I think this would provide precious guidelines for readers, and speed up some RPL design. > > Finally, we think that "hysteresis" can provably improve RPL performance, and thus it will be included in this draft. To be honest, there is a "hidden" phrase: "...and if the first component values are equal *or differ less than a predefined threshold*..." (section 4.1, first sentence) indicating our effort to include hysteresis in this draft. We will give more emphasis on that point. > > [C.C] I noticed that reference, but it should be worth to explicitly speak about it. I also agree that the Hysteresis mechanism defined in the MRHOF draft greatly improve the stability of the topology and should be highly recommended. BTW, some guidelines about how to determine the good threshold value would be interesting. > > Thanks for your valuable comments, > Panos. > > CÃdric. > > > --- ÎÏÎÏ ÎÎÏ., 03/08/11, Î/Î C Chauvenet <c.chauvenet at watteco.com> ÎÎÏÎÏÎ: > > > ÎÏÏ: C Chauvenet <c.chauvenet at watteco.com> > ÎÎÎÎ: Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics > ÎÏÎÏ: "zahariad at teihal.gr" <zahariad at teihal.gr> > ÎÎÎÎ.: "TRAKADAS PANOS" <trakadasp at adae.gr>, "roll at ietf.org" <roll at ietf.org> > ÎÎÎÏÎÎÎÎÎÎ: ÎÎÏÎÏÏÎ, 3 ÎÏÎÎÏÏÏÎÏ 2011, 18:46 > > Hi Theodore, > > I found your draft interesting and it gave me some useful guidelines for metric's design. > > I've several comments on this : > > I fail to understand well the "Order Relation" you use in Table 1. > The definition of "metric order relation" given on page 4 doesn't really helped me. > Could you help me understand the Order Relation column in the table? > > In this table in particular (Figure 1): > > - Could you precise your view of the Link-Color metric (Why is it in the integer domain, why the order relation in "minimum" ?). > > - As far as I understand the Order Relation, it seems that the LQL order relation should not be "maximum" but rather "minimum" (same relation as ETX, excluding the 0 value). > > > More generally, I would be happy to see in the document some formulas examples for metric computation, or maybe some guidelines. > > Some example of metrics composition would also be great (You mention one in your draft with is ETX + RE (remainging Energy). Do you have some idea about other set of metric that would be interesting to bind ? > > I finally think that it should be worth to add some content about the mechanisms that aim to deal with metric's dynamics (Multi Threshold, EWMA, Low pass Filters, ...). Some of them are mentioned at the end of the rpl metric draft. > > Best, > > CÃdric. > > Le 2 aoÃt 2011 Ã 02:55, Theodore Zahariadis a Ãcrit : > > > Dear all, > > My colleague Dr. Panos Trakadas and myself are working on an EC-funded > > research project, called VITRO (Virtualized Distributed platform of Smart > > objects - http://www.vitro-fp7.eu/), which has adopted RPL as the primary > > routing protocol and we are currently performing some simulations and tests. > > > > By monitoring roll, we have noticed that three (sorry if we have missed any) > > I-D are discussed in the ROLL WG (draft-ietf-roll-minrank-hysteresis-of, > > draft-ietf-roll-of0, draft-gnawali-roll-etxof), defining RPL Objective > > Functions related to a single routing metric (either hop-count or ETX). > > > > In VITRO, each sensor may be part of many virtual networks (even from > > different administrative domains) and must be able to concurrently support > > multiple user requests even with contradicting QoS characteristics. It is > > obvious that in such cases, a composite routing metric is of great > > importance. > > > > In draft-zahariadis-roll-metrics-composition-00 > > (http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zahariadis-roll-metrics-composition/) > > , we aim at specifying the guidelines for designing efficient composite > > routing metrics to be applied at RPL routing protocol. > > > > We would be happy to receive your comments > > > > Best Regards, > > Theodore Zahariadis > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Ass. Prof. Theodore Zahariadis, PhD > > Technological Educational Institute of Chalkida > > Psachna, Chalkida, Greece > > Tel: +30 22280 99550 , +30 6932495045 > > Skype: theodore.zahariadis > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Roll mailing list > > Roll at ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll > > > _______________________________________________ > Roll mailing list > Roll at ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
- [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metrics Theodore Zahariadis
- Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metri… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metri… C Chauvenet
- Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metri… Theodore Zahariadis
- Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metri… Panos Trakadas
- Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metri… C Chauvenet
- Re: [Roll] FW: New I-D on composite routing metri… Mischa Dohler