Re: [Roll] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Alvaro Retana <> Fri, 11 September 2020 20:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0DB83A0955; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id krwD5oqvP0XX; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::635]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BC8E3A0812; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id i26so15352874ejb.12; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/KhjEFzBT4AGgqjp/lKFZFdebdF627pmShYaHKO9fCU=; b=MKpvxIuhePE7JMkoDIjr2SH8Oyya9n2VWoXHRbr0vFH2shOkJBkRgJ50P2MaOxlBhJ uFXAGXFGoYMY8z9qzI+hpd7nSSL4GoN94A1AKmzcUqQZ0Biz5N2MB9lNCW+cb1pIaJSI U++6l8IXgApNf4e5Z8RXW+4L491mA2vKkYFO9Z/UlMi0ASFG5g+nqwhf8bv2WQfow2VA P6QOMOYjB42buPJky7h6JwWtajJcUnIaQns5vsrYRoNofwqSTzFTWVGpnpKnPy0Bg5fY 8n7FpxGzfzbop05yAt6TZibt+lRAg/MmJ/L0RWCepcyat4mxILKLPDmy3te5lvKxbyIE tYvw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/KhjEFzBT4AGgqjp/lKFZFdebdF627pmShYaHKO9fCU=; b=dU19yrzzoeksG4hR8Uz8o3m2SbjMYjNk/LU2Xe2ZsQnac19D1Mwqrrf2XyR/ZT6MqF EgGKNSad6hh9+VtQ+2HqLsg0r4rfmt/jQKEJmyRp8QIF8o7n5khrAucxHcQmvfbJI7T5 /jPfd9JleqQWbZQZG8DGwpBkObaqRixd+Idfeg0oUrxA1SOjfTnZuo3JtMj+fD/Rdlm2 hZJSNr6l7JxX44o03/o0O4KIXm/5zeA+EJxg8apzkszZ1+nQbHpNVgL+5JhtsBp5vK3f iS6BkdR9UmKznLBffDoqKMMeGB9AbGVXgTkPNpS2Y8bxhrybJm14AMUjlTEPGf4NrTI/ 8CrQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533difmgMmQD89ePSTOBp5JBcKnEiLxdO6XqleZrOZD2cTfw3e2M m3bIOtQWeLCfLXLhYMCEkr6OMFIhYsUL7vZPfhU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxt2mYAFH1M6rhAWEDnP2EnzRiLeifD1QBLjDIt6x5iA+FFSexSeVS8lCt5ywxrTmK9NDMJjS0tkXqtX6uWuiE=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1690:: with SMTP id s16mr3659712ejd.122.1599855893908; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by with HTTPREST; Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:24:52 -0400
From: Alvaro Retana <>
In-Reply-To: <4724.1599853045@localhost>
References: <> <> <> <17053.1599841430@localhost> <> <4724.1599853045@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:24:52 -0400
Message-ID: <>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <>, Benjamin Kaduk <>, The IESG <>, Alvaro Retana <>, "" <>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>, Ines Robles <>, "" <>, Michael Richardson <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Benjamin Kaduk's Discuss on draft-ietf-roll-turnon-rfc8138-14: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 20:24:57 -0000

On September 11, 2020 at 3:37:32 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:

> Pascal, can we make this say: For a MOP value of 7, there is no "T" flag,
> and the compression behaviour will be defined by future work.

If we do that, this would be the first document to indicate that the
flags apply to some MOPs and not other.  In this case the bit used for
the T flag would still be available for MOP 7.

Besides possibly updating rfc6550 to indicate that this is possible,
we will also need to update the registry so that we can show how the
bits are allocated: bit 2 is allocated for 0-6, and available for MOP

All that can be done.

I was trying to avoid that work given that we don't know exactly what
MOP 7 will be; while there's a chance that the mopex draft will build
on the changes we would do here, there could also be a chance that it

In any case, this is probably something that needs to be discussed in the WG.