IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] [roll] #86: G flag: do we need that text?

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Wed, 04 April 2012 14:07 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 2831221F87A8 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 07:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.434, BAYES_00=-2.599, FF_IHOPE_YOU_SINK=2.166, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 6o0amVVLHAEh for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 07:07:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-2.cisco.com (ams-iport-2.cisco.com [144.254.224.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8467421F87A7 for <roll@ietf.org>; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 07:07:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=pthubert@cisco.com; l=2207; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1333548424; x=1334758024; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:cc; bh=Hgv0PKG4F4M56+03yLG6VQsozfOvXEwS2GrhRNfa2rU=; b=CAqirmUh+qptJfn3VInTKhm6xBoISXInwHh12u6B2qN5oYN9lqYQ1rrC DDlUpe04PId/2I1BBsQ2N00zExGBC1XqqEL1aPOZb1oCZKxrjSOXfvg14 QDxPvyTaEVCI9+Oc84Sqv/hSSrj4ZfPCy3ijWWmRSPTaVxb+wgkZaFGZj A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAD9VfE+Q/khN/2dsb2JhbABFDrgPgQeCCQEBAQMBAQEBDwEdCjQLBQcEAgEIEQMBAQELBhcBBgEmHwkIAQEEARIIGodiBQubHp5jBI9xYwSkKoFpgjA5gVIX
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,369,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="70118998"
Received: from ams-core-4.cisco.com ([144.254.72.77]) by ams-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Apr 2012 14:06:56 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-201.cisco.com (xbh-ams-201.cisco.com [144.254.75.7]) by ams-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q34E6und004589; Wed, 4 Apr 2012 14:06:56 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-108.cisco.com ([144.254.74.83]) by xbh-ams-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 4 Apr 2012 16:06:56 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 16:05:28 +0200
Message-ID: <BDF2740C082F6942820D95BAEB9E1A84015DE3B3@XMB-AMS-108.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <1574412879.1807702.1333547692001.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Roll] [roll] #86: G flag: do we need that text?
Thread-Index: Ac0SaophQJJzgKBuR2mLoCsE3HbXbwAASefg
References: <87wr5v8vpp.fsf@kelsey-ws.hq.ember.com> <1574412879.1807702.1333547692001.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu>, Richard Kelsey <richard.kelsey@ember.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Apr 2012 14:06:56.0858 (UTC) FILETIME=[32052BA0:01CD126C]
Cc: roll@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #86: G flag: do we need that text?
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: Wed, 04 Apr 2012 14:07:06 -0000

Hello Mukul

Floating vs. Grounded depends on the goal of the DODAG. I asked you and
will ask again what is your goal?
If the goal is to reach the root, then G is 1... If you want to signal
something to the OF using the G bit, leave it  open.

Cheers,
Pascal


-----Original Message-----
From: roll-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Mukul Goyal
Sent: mercredi 4 avril 2012 15:55
To: Richard Kelsey
Cc: roll@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #86: G flag: do we need that text?

>The G flag is 0 if and only if the DODAG is floating.

I think that the G flag is 1 if and only if the DODAG is grounded. The
temporary DAGs used in P2P-RPL are not grounded, they are temporary. I
think that all transient/temporary DAGs are floating by their very
nature.

Thanks
Mukul

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Kelsey" <richard.kelsey@ember.com>
To: roll@ietf.org
Cc: mukul@UWM.EDU, jpv@cisco.com, roll@ietf.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2012 8:36:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #86: G flag: do we need that text?

> From: roll issue tracker <trac+roll@trac.tools.ietf.org>
> Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2012 13:08:50 +0000
> 
> #86: G flag: do we need that text?
> 
>  Problem (resolition is proposed)
>  ------------------------------
>  Disagreement on the meaning of 'G' bit and imposed setting to 0;
> 
>  Proposed resolution
>  ---------------------------
>  The origin sets the G flag based on its perception of whether joining

> how the flag's value would affect the rank calculation under the OF  
> being used. By default, the G flag is set to zero given the temporary

> nature of the DAG being created.

I disagree with the proposed resolution.  It adds needless confusion.
The G flag is 0 if and only if the DODAG is floating.
There is no point to allowing floating DODAGs with a P2P-RDO option.  I
suggest that the G bit be set to 1 and that routers be explicitly
prohibited from creating floating DODAGs with a P2P-RDO option.
                                   -Richard Kelsey
_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email