Re: [Roll] routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <> Fri, 18 March 2016 10:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A4812D7D3; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 03:47:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.521
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.521 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jj9IzXy8fy0k; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 03:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23E1A12D539; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 03:47:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=15967; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1458298022; x=1459507622; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=c1cA6996k096zLpwLFB3kpldH1YMD5yXIVzLR+u+s+4=; b=mBC4XVKvu1vzIxrC4d7bafa6IWnrJxVx6I1Ni+k57a+vvGNIBOP04exU 8fXS7lIACKe4mZMBedUpEP1xSUcS0CEIJy1QvQQ2/0Hrl4pVD30pw9nNw ZgVhN8URjGHuz28W615NwGmEjuSIEUi45R3wt/ouJ+tFdhSpQ39s6w6XM c=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.24,354,1454976000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="87902178"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 18 Mar 2016 10:47:00 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u2IAl0NR018238 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:47:00 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 05:47:00 -0500
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Fri, 18 Mar 2016 05:46:59 -0500
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <>
To: Gabriel Montenegro <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
Thread-Topic: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL
Thread-Index: AdGAmop9h2qYFLg/TgebhfKJtHrSXwAZ6IKw
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:46:42 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:46:18 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0a3e093af6aa4648abc0ed798d92ae5cXCHRCD001ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 14:07:35 -0700
Cc: "" <>, Brian Haberman <>, Michael Richardson <>, Suresh Krishnan <>, "James Woodyatt \(\)" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [Roll] routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 10:47:04 -0000

Hello Gabriel:

That is perfectly fine with me, and I have 2 procedural questions:

1)      Can I submit as draft-roll or do we need an adoption call there?

2)      Draft -6lorh is stable, ready to last call IMHO.  The critical decisions involving formats and header orders are probably already taken. What may be still subject to discussion and that is of specific value to ROLL is bit mapping to protocols or things like that. Since we are transitioning areas, it would be good that 6lo expresses a blessing of the current shape and form so that unless there is a major change, we do not need to recirculate the document again through areas to go to IESG. Based on the fact that 6lo adopted it in the first place, will 6lo be happy that the ROLL WG completes the editorial work on RPL relayed semantics and ships from routing area without handing back the result?



From: Gabriel Montenegro []
Sent: jeudi 17 mars 2016 23:16
To:;;; Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <>
Cc:;; Michael Richardson <>ca>; Alvaro Retana (aretana) <>om>; Suresh Krishnan <>om>; James Woodyatt ( <>om>; Ralph Droms <>om>; Brian Haberman <>
Subject: routing-dispatch (6lorh) change in ownership from 6LO to ROLL

Hi folks,

We've had some discussions among the 6lo and ROLL chairs and personnel as well as the responsible AD's (Brian, Alvaro and Suresh) to the effect that the following draft (aka 6lorh) is better suited for ROLL than 6lo:


This draft uses the framework established in the paging-dispatch draft, which is clearly in 6lo's scope:


We're moving 6lorh (routing-dispatch) to ROLL. Sure, 6lorh uses something out of 6lo (the paging-dispatch draft), but it is so specific to ROLL that the document belongs there.

This is analogous to how DHC has operated over many years: base DHCP format changes happen in DHC, but applications of DHC mechanisms specific to any given technology are best developed by the relevant WG (of course, with review by DHC to double-check the use of DHC facilities).

Similarly, 6lo will be in the loop to review routing-dispatch, to make sure it uses paging-dispatch properly. But routing-dispatch is so specific to ROLL that further development, WG LC, IESG processing, etc., will happen under ROLL.


Gabriel (on behalf of ROLL and 6LO chairs)