[Roll] enrollment priority

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 22 November 2021 14:15 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@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 1A16A3A0AFD for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 06:15:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
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 qCaSmsS05Jfv for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 06:15:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 881953A0B04 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 06:15:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6A2C18063 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:18:23 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id X7TiKAGCLFCP for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:18:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF1081802C for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:18:19 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1637590699; bh=Lg8z7T5a4ZTcJqNLsFr0pNeifM7obaboCSOzX/bNkY0=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=io3zjig8m+ieG4RieT+O09Vee6k1n9uMakiOVD8MKOCPgMeUsGz2Ygh6eUg2SqWvH jVPaVSHr/59Ic3zB+2nyirQcx5RfZuOuu7v/f72Y069EmLAXWtKbOz9Bs2Qj7c+GsB LsTsafAEDypL8nlpGLYj5buodvcnlLgApvd4HTYoiMhqUoAFNxaAC2+ZE6zioTADZW PsbJNn4WN0EJGyB26REizlYa6smlh/sbLr3Mumprq7j1KBBSyytHXY80mRfk7TZJKl NBb6DmOiI4fJy9ERihlpf1wvIQov49oEt+z+3PH+6lhEkvtTSU+X0ZuAjg5p0WXvb4 +0Fb8g4wZLEYg==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7BF324C for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:15:35 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: roll@ietf.org
X-Attribution: mcr
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 09:15:35 -0500
Message-ID: <30208.1637590535@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/mr3tPcXymIqsjbaLLZAuk6d2QmU>
Subject: [Roll] enrollment priority
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <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: Mon, 22 Nov 2021 14:15:47 -0000

I'm trying to edit draft-ietf-roll-enrollment-priority to reflect the WG
consensus.

I think that we agreed that the nodes within the DODAG should not change
their enrollment priority.  It can be set by the root in it's DIO, and it
will propogate through the DODAG according to the normal trickle settings.
Changes to the priority will *not*(?!) reset the trickle timer.

https://github.com/roll-wg/draft-ietf-roll-enrollment-priority/pull/9 is the
pull request I just made, which may be easier to see the changes.

specifically, I've deleted this line:

https://github.com/roll-wg/draft-ietf-roll-enrollment-priority/pull/9/files#diff-fe544a5ddaac2d404d7b76aa1204d54e36f5eb6618f3f52f0c0dc56dca4061faL169

   The nodes then adjust this base value based upon their observed
   congestion, emitting their adjusted DIO value to their children.

I actually find that there isn't a lot else to delete.

I am concerned that I did not understand the WG consensus correctly, so I am
have not yet published this version.

Do we want to retain the ability for the root to send a value 0-0x7f into the DODAG,
or was it only 0 and 1 that were useful?

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide