IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] knowing which multiple metrics matter: MRHOF related questions

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 25 May 2012 19:29 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
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 E34AA21F855B for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 May 2012 12:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.904
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.904 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.050, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
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 qD654-1i4OK6 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 May 2012 12:29:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3AE621F853C for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 May 2012 12:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D6658528; Fri, 25 May 2012 15:28:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 268E59823C; Fri, 25 May 2012 15:29:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4A598239; Fri, 25 May 2012 15:29:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD802FA32EF@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <12418.1337957631@marajade.sandelman.ca> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD802FA32EF@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 15:29:49 -0400
Message-ID: <31164.1337974189@marajade.sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: "roll@ietf.org" <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] knowing which multiple metrics matter: MRHOF related questions
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: Fri, 25 May 2012 19:30:00 -0000

>>>>> "Pascal" == Pascal Thubert <(pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>> writes:
    Pascal> I think RPL does not want to take party there. The OF is a
    Pascal> piece of logic to tie metrics and policies together.  

My question is:

- do the nodes of a DODAG have to use the same metrics to pick a parent,
  (and if so, how do they agree)
  I think that they do not, so long as they use an algorithm (such as
  MRHOF) which has certain properties.

- if we had multiple RPL instances in an LLN, using different metrics,
  then we would have multiple RPL Instances and DODAGs.  The different
  set of metrics would not co-exist in the same RPL Instance.


-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works 
IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email