Re: [Roll] processing of multiple SRH-6LoRH
"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Tue, 26 April 2016 11:22 UTC
Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.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 D49BA12D0F8 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:22:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.514
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.514 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DC_PNG_UNO_LARGO=0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_RATIO_06=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 XaS9dYoUaVGE for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:22:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAA2512D0DF for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 04:22:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=103617; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1461669721; x=1462879321; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=N15oaBIw45WaM1tAKJgXSWCo3KPiPQOkA0+iXIf+BJg=; b=NQUgiO9XMNmv//ekoiIRtQyVXhGcvRTGbZin7sV8N4GWV1iTii1cakMV PuJjBL/tNHDxcow9O/UEps2Ud/GC8VE+1W0hyIp7G0KKc3zuUWVI5DMN3 SUmSQIYiF6N74TxvdfwB0bFz/shOHd8PThaDZ+zeRU4gDFzg4/rgC1gVn g=;
X-Files: image002.png : 69836
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0C5AgAiTh9X/5NdJa1egmwNP1OBA7UDgWaDDQ6BdIYOAoE3OBQBAQEBAQEBZSeEQQEBAQMBBSAIAVALAgEIHQEBASYCBRABDgwlAgQBEQEGAgaIFAjDdgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQ0IhiGES4oVBYdxhxWJCgGFDgGJAI8Yjy8BHgFDggIDG4FLiG1/AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,536,1454976000"; d="png'150?scan'150,208,217,150";a="95700078"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Apr 2016 11:21:59 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (xch-rcd-001.cisco.com [173.37.102.11]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u3QBLxjq021975 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:21:59 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com (173.37.102.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 06:21:58 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) by XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com ([173.37.102.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Tue, 26 Apr 2016 06:21:58 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, "roll@ietf.org" <roll@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: processing of multiple SRH-6LoRH
Thread-Index: AQHRnJ2wylNlxUmyfEazm/DB5NwW4p+cFgjQ
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:21:34 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:21:04 +0000
Message-ID: <5e93d811225e4a9bab5840a750012eb1@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
References: <3835.1461332920@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
In-Reply-To: <3835.1461332920@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.55.22.4]
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_5e93d811225e4a9bab5840a750012eb1XCHRCD001ciscocom_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/f1lGTKkI4HQDdKCgGqoTSpsx72o>
Subject: Re: [Roll] processing of multiple SRH-6LoRH
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 11:22:03 -0000
Hello Michael: Sorry I failed to respond to this. > Pascal, > > section 5.5 of routing-dispatch says: > > Else, if there is a next SRH-6LoRH of a Type with a larger or equal > value, meaning a same or lesser compression yielding same or larger > compressed forms, then the SRH-6LoRH is removed. > > okay, so when the new SRH provides more bytes, we remove the consumed > one. > > Else, the first entry of the next SRH-6LoRH is popped from the next > SRH-6LoRH and coalesced with the first entry of this SRH-6LoRH. > > To get here, the next SRH-6LoRH must be of a higher level of compression, so > it encodes addresses with fewer bytes. What is the logic to making the next > next 6LoRH smaller (popping), and keeping the larger current 6LoRH? This is illustrated below: [cid:image002.png@01D19FBE.5837F580] The root sends a type 4 with the fill address of A (say that they do not share a same prefix) When A receives the packet it must remove the first address in the SRH which is self. As illustrated A pops B's compressed address from the next header (the type 3) and coalesces that in the first (type 4) to get the full address of B. > Why not just drop the current 6loRH here and have fewer bytes, period? If we had removed the type 4 then the first SRH would have been the type 3 and the prefix would be lost. Makes sense? Pascal
- [Roll] processing of multiple SRH-6LoRH Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] processing of multiple SRH-6LoRH Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] processing of multiple SRH-6LoRH Michael Richardson