IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local

Kerry Lynn <kerlyn@ieee.org> Tue, 15 October 2013 17:33 UTC

Return-Path: <kerlyn2001@gmail.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 1C3DB11E8121 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 HB962TkjZfpU for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:33:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x230.google.com (mail-we0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B0511E81F0 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f176.google.com with SMTP id w62so8784594wes.35 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=WInjMYBU0iWzCS0KNuYP9yawPFsHJ/khU/Gql+EmsRg=; b=fEu+EhZRQM1KLHafsdGfjT8xqGhTz5R02Xg8yAPSvSiaVKSFNN/UpYJWwHx5bZPBxA 4eK1ViNnUdXosb0s4oLysQy601NWHYTYmYaLHzAquZYsCtcJ+s38aROaBs9l7wAym1ey ynU+JWlYIbeipocP8oruPnae7WDhs1rBEbZlWXQZyQ7sLGRBG8wRV0Wt8OEkObvGirAN Ak+WYPHKeNaaUZR9/PgSbq6LdINuAM77dJerPZtDysR1+USFHmG1lgUpgVGbZJwWIH+G N+hwt2XQAqdkeQQ3atEfEVth7HwmdvTpA/9j8SUisJUA2GUYVOqSt1a5Q71c+ftostV0 ixRA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.13.13 with SMTP id d13mr20810003wic.34.1381858400470; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: kerlyn2001@gmail.com
Received: by 10.216.227.132 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Oct 2013 10:33:20 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <19709.1381857380@sandelman.ca>
References: <CE82BA46.24343%d.sturek@att.net> <4518F39EB578034D8C99A9B7776CDBA301BE0FA1@xmb-aln-x04.cisco.com> <19709.1381857380@sandelman.ca>
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 13:33:20 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: AvDHDrOlXfxTghU3HdkdtFmgM4k
Message-ID: <CABOxzu2XhYx52Kh-bwnv76dqxJorxB0HHP4qn2CbGtuscH-+_Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Kerry Lynn <kerlyn@ieee.org>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2a462170b3504e8cafbd0"
Cc: "mariainesrobles@gmail.com" <mariainesrobles@gmail.com>, "Jonathan Hui (johui)" <johui@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [roll] #132: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-04 - Clarify scope value of 3 - subnet-local
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: 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: Tue, 15 Oct 2013 17:33:32 -0000

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Michael Richardson
<mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>wrote:

>
> Ralph Droms (rdroms) <rdroms@cisco.com> wrote:
>     >> Also, I am in favor of Ralph's proposal on using PAN ID for MPL
> scope
>     >> 3.  I don't see how any automatic configuration could take place if
> we
>     >> can't identify a concrete identifier for the scope.  The other
>     >> alternative (and to be honest the one I thought we were going to
> use)
>     >> is DODAG ID.  This would allow your scenario where a subnet of
>     >> different link technologies could support MPL domain 3.
>
>     > Don - at present, MPL is, as far as I know, independent of RPL.  In
>     > particular, MPL can be used in a mesh that does not use RPL.
>     > Therefore, there might not be a DODAG ID to use as a MPL domain
>     > identifier.
>
> While I agree with you, that MPL is separate from RPL in the same way that
> HTTP can run over V32bis or ITU-T Rec. X.214 (OSI TPx) if we want it to,
> if one want to use MPL in another environment one will have to specify
> the boundaries somehow.
>
> If MPL were defined in terms of scope 0x02 messages (as the Trickle
Algorithm is) we'd be done by now.  An MPL domain would then be the
set of links connected by  MPL forwarders, with the boundary set by
administratively opting out interfaces (a MPL domain boundary would
thus be defined as cutting through a node, not a link).

Using PANID limits one to 802.15.4-ish networks: what is the PANID of
> ethernet?  ROLL is specifically chartered to work across a multitude of
> different layer-2 protocols.
>
> Scope 0x03 is not defined on 802.3.  It is only needed at all on mesh
networks, therefore it is defined (or not) on a link layer basis.

-K-


> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email