Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on runnning MPL forwarders
peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl> Fri, 04 October 2013 12:03 UTC
Return-Path: <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
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 BA31921F86BE for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 05:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.154
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.154 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545]
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 PI5pOZfEuWVy for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 05:03:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl (smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56DA421F8790 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 05:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from roundcube.xs4all.nl (roundcube12.xs4all.net [194.109.20.211]) by smtp-vbr1.xs4all.nl (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r94C2T0e020947; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 14:02:30 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from stokcons@xs4all.nl)
Received: from AMontpellier-654-1-22-56.w90-0.abo.wanadoo.fr ([90.0.37.56]) by roundcube.xs4all.nl with HTTP (HTTP/1.1 POST); Fri, 04 Oct 2013 14:02:29 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 14:02:29 +0200
From: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>
To: Yusuke DOI <yusuke.doi@toshiba.co.jp>
Organization: vanderstok consultancy
Mail-Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org
In-Reply-To: <524EA0B9.4090908@toshiba.co.jp>
References: <524E7734.1010604@toshiba.co.jp> <161bac5b78b2dd33ad805a81e7df83f4@xs4all.nl> <524EA0B9.4090908@toshiba.co.jp>
Message-ID: <641a5c59776214374984816097e08d9a@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender: stokcons@xs4all.nl (q8svXxnbx7DmvEgJaXKdqCA9dzKt/gHc)
User-Agent: XS4ALL Webmail
X-Virus-Scanned: by XS4ALL Virus Scanner
Cc: roll@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on runnning MPL forwarders
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: consultancy@vanderstok.org, 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: <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, 04 Oct 2013 12:03:28 -0000
Hi Yusuke, For the moment the parameters are general for al interfaces, seeds and messages. In the case of changing per message, the parameter sets need to be attached to each message entry. (for me that is a large change) Second for synchronous change, parameters need to be transported in message from seed. (Another large change to the message format). Please be aware that there are as many trickle timers as there are messages outstanding, so what is the start of the interval? Anything I missed here? peter Yusuke DOI schreef op 2013-10-04 13:04: > Hi Peter, > > I have not recognized it needs LARGE change. My first idea was to > replace the parameters at the very beginning of an interval (step 2 of > RFC6206 section 4.2) for each trickle timer. Because it's difficult to > synchronize the update, I think unbalanced retransmission may occur in > transient period. I assume it's acceptable (safe enough). > > Could you tell me about your concerns that requires LARGE spec update? > > Regards, > > Yusuke > > > (2013-10-04 17:29), peter van der Stok wrote: > Hi Yusuke. > > I think you may "safely" change Imin, ,k, Imax and repeat per new > message for all involved forwarders, while leaving all earlier messages > unaffected. BUT this needs LARGE changes to the current spec. > > My 2 cents, > > peter > > > > Yusuke DOI schreef op 2013-10-04 10:07: > Hi, > > I have a simple question: is it possible to update MPL parameters of > running forwarder instances? > > To maintain the system in 'good state', I expect some sort of > parameter tuning on MPL. Especially for the systems dynamically grows, > static configuration of MPL parameters will be difficult. For example, > DHCPv6 reconfigure request can be used to update MPL forwarder > parameter. However, I'm not sure it's 'safe' to update parameters (K, > Imin, Imax) of running MPL forwarder instances. > > I think it's safe if there are no transmission / no valid seed set. Is > it possible to update a running MPL forwarder parameter without > breaking current state? > > Regards, > > Yusuke > > > _______________________________________________ > Roll mailing list > Roll@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll > _______________________________________________ > Roll mailing list > Roll@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
- [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on runnn… Yusuke DOI
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… peter van der Stok
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Yusuke DOI
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… peter van der Stok
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Yusuke DOI
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Don Sturek
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… DOI Yusuke
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Don Sturek
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Philip Levis
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Roll] Question on MPL: parameter update on r… Yusuke DOI