Re: [Roll] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info

Xavier Vilajosana <xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu> Wed, 15 October 2014 06:45 UTC

Return-Path: <xvilajosana@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30AB51A038E; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 fpOcoYKMoROh; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x229.google.com (mail-ig0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 185711A038D; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-f169.google.com with SMTP id uq10so19315106igb.4 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:45:53 -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=G/sBC0kzsgGAanPBnvcc8rlB+0+AodoB/1ZOk143Gz4=; b=Y1KG8oqK5K6b46jaz43RG8M9hX3NsKimAh/rTIMDFgXDdxYEH+0iTQi7gphgnyf7XI 9ukBKahdrP/aUCjkFWJbmh3XzKLReLhsRcL6ZnlkKdtUr+4qCxbewAX9ZmuJ3RVQLqLI 7p8LfgabMcASf71zXrr4aHifJ8DUjVuB8edws4Xdfxb6RkClD7JWSZEX05wx3CvDEGR4 7ZDfB5js/BHjzbgwG+7BrcDHeHBG76tloQjMhoE/wRPbwUygl79HS2/bK7voTTFeLvv0 dq/GAKBEYsa8dOVrT55Pf2Jpn7xeUH7OGLsvS2ctWh0vM3e+9o/KU2rb3q6ECky5tNAl 15Iw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.39.80 with SMTP id n16mr11736962igk.49.1413355553433; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: xvilajosana@gmail.com
Received: by 10.64.13.142 with HTTP; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842E1AEC5@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842E1AEC5@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 08:45:53 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: z0iDr1Ia7ifqHTne8WXOEwvfqeQ
Message-ID: <CAMsDxWQKgRvY+4LmMEB9LWqNQDipCmeq8ot3aR=wJNedgstVnA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Xavier Vilajosana <xvilajosana@eecs.berkeley.edu>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f83a259b42e6b0505707be5
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/pTVxyZ62M2SKfMh-4_5cnD3Ugr4
Cc: "6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <6lo-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>, "6tisch-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <6tisch-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>, "roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <roll-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Call to confirm a rough consensus on RPL info
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 06:45:56 -0000

All,

I fully support that approach. Hope to contribute and make it happen as
soon as possible.

regards,
Xavi

2014-10-15 8:32 GMT+02:00 Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>om>:

> Dear all:
>
> During the 6TiSCH bi-weekly virtual interim on Friday, we agreed that the
> minimal I-D (draft-ietf-6tisch-minimal) must indicate the compression
> method for the RPL Information (see RFC 6553), so as to ensure
> interoperation between 6TiSCH devices.
>
> We discussed our options, basically either a 6lo approach or a Flow Label
> approach. The rough consensus at the call was to try and focus on a 6lo
> approach and evaluate where that leads us.
>
> Because this means that the minimal draft will have a normative reference
> on a WIP I-D, we recognized that this approach may delay the publication of
> the final RFC. Per IETF procedures, the minimal draft will be stalled in
> the RFC editor queue in MISREF state until the 6lo work completes. So the
> consensus was also to support the 6lo work so as to expedite it as much as
> possible.
>
> The idea would be to republish a standard track draft-ietf-6lo- ASAP,
> based on the existing proposals (which are rapidly converging); then, Xavi
> would include a normative reference to that work in the minimal I-D before
> its publication to IESG, which is scheduled in November (yes, this is
> aggressive).
>
> This is a call to confirm the rough consensus on the ML, open till the
> next interim call on October 24th. Please provide us with any relevant
> comment (and participate to the 6lo discussions in the meantime!).
>
> If the result is positive:
> - we plan to call for a 6lo WG doc adoption in Hawaii
> - we are looking for an aggressive schedule to limit the impact on the
> publication of the minimal RFC
>
> 6TiSCH may host the 6lo discussion so as to:
> - benefit from the early morning schedule
> - attract more 6TiSCH people to the discussion
>
> More the published minutes:
> - Webex recording:
> https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/lsr.php?RCID=36a3b7df06694258a3ac65bfc519212f
> - Wiki: https://bitbucket.org/6tisch/meetings/wiki/141010_webex
> - Slides:
> https://bitbucket.org/6tisch/meetings/src/master/141010_webex/slides_141010_webex.ppt
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pascal
>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>