Re: [Roll] Way forward for draft-clausen-lln-rpl-experiences

Philip Levis <pal@cs.stanford.edu> Sat, 12 May 2012 04:48 UTC

Return-Path: <pal@cs.stanford.edu>
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 02DFF21F85D8 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 May 2012 21:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.435
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.164, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 jGQN2ViRUZzc for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 May 2012 21:48:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cs-smtp-2.Stanford.EDU (cs-smtp-2.Stanford.EDU [171.64.64.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E1A721F8454 for <roll@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 May 2012 21:48:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [76.14.66.110] (helo=[192.168.0.103]) by cs-smtp-2.Stanford.EDU with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <pal@cs.stanford.edu>) id 1ST4GC-0002y8-Sy; Fri, 11 May 2012 21:48:53 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Philip Levis <pal@cs.stanford.edu>
In-Reply-To: <258D7E2F-F0C7-49EA-B831-81070C86EDB3@thomasclausen.org>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 21:10:39 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3CB5FAC8-4F2A-4B6B-9024-23D4CCFDD5D6@cs.stanford.edu>
References: <258D7E2F-F0C7-49EA-B831-81070C86EDB3@thomasclausen.org>
To: Thomas Heide Clausen <IETF@ThomasClausen.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
X-Scan-Signature: 2d1a4fa5d0150c38835749a59b44c419
Cc: roll WG <roll@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Way forward for draft-clausen-lln-rpl-experiences
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: Sat, 12 May 2012 04:48:56 -0000

On May 10, 2012, at 11:25 PM, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote:

> Dear JP, Michael, all
> 
> Upon JPs invitation, draft-clausen-lln-rpl-experiences was presented and discussed at the Paris meeting.
> 
> The authors consider the document complete and "done", and are looking to take it forward in the IETF 
> process for publication as "Informational RFC" in the very near future. 
> 
> We would therefore like to ask the WG chairs, if the ROLL WG is willing to accept and progress this 
> document towards publication?
> 
> Best,
> 
> Thomas, Ulrich, Yuichi, Jiazi and Axel
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> 


As I alluded to in Paris, I don't really think this is currently a valid informational document; the document it *should* be is guidelines on how to implement RPL, not a description of a series of basic and naive mistakes. Unless we want a companion document, which for each of the issues raised says how to solve it.  We wouldn't write an RFC on someone's experience with congestion collapse after implementing a transport protocol without congestion control. Just my 2c.

Phil