IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Adoption of draft-goyal-roll-rpl-compression as a new ROLL WG document

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 05 September 2011 13:59 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.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 CC75C21F8B68 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.379
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.379 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.220, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 rBCZpUrNf9be for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:59:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D0021F8B36 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 06:59:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=pthubert@cisco.com; l=725; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1315231288; x=1316440888; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to:cc; bh=j+60h6LvDrKGoBCm1w87FPNWhyx95pFP4id2Oo3ooX4=; b=ZR9PdUnkrjpWMGsHaMZnfotCxRESuknPdYNuFTpvxEvu5Tk4ZlDrJi9e ejm9OtWR5LahLKWgcImjwIErg8PC61CEFgtvaMkaT/xQq61Wrz8yPVus+ F0+WV7ZOg6XsXzil4lZQrqqLTbknKYAu+Bdb6zJZyz2K/vb/RLeZg7RYH U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EANXUZE6Q/khL/2dsb2JhbABDDqgKeIFGAQEBAQMSAR0KPxACAQgiBhgGAVYBAQQBGhqheQGeSoYKYASYRos9Og
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.68,333,1312156800"; d="scan'208";a="113996110"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Sep 2011 14:01:25 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-101.cisco.com (xbh-ams-101.cisco.com [144.254.74.71]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p85E1PEn009615; Mon, 5 Sep 2011 14:01:25 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-107.cisco.com ([144.254.74.82]) by xbh-ams-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 5 Sep 2011 16:01:25 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:01:24 +0200
Message-ID: <6A2A459175DABE4BB11DE2026AA50A5D0565D771@XMB-AMS-107.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPxkH3iFZdu-781GuY8GXfZqnHUNHN87cTwSYj03zXPVQ+U=Cg@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Roll] Adoption of draft-goyal-roll-rpl-compression as a new ROLL WG document
Thread-Index: Acxr0joExRY32bp+TQurtKV2go/qTQAAORAA
References: <16050.1315103775@marajade.sandelman.ca><465899107.187484.1315179349447.JavaMail.root@mail05.pantherlink.uwm.edu> <CAPxkH3iFZdu-781GuY8GXfZqnHUNHN87cTwSYj03zXPVQ+U=Cg@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "Angelo P. Castellani" <angelo@castellani.net>, Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Sep 2011 14:01:25.0830 (UTC) FILETIME=[4D234E60:01CC6BD4]
Cc: roll WG <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Adoption of draft-goyal-roll-rpl-compression as a new ROLL WG document
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: Mon, 05 Sep 2011 13:59:44 -0000

Hello Angelo

> - do we really need two different RPL dialects to exist?

I, for one, do not. I think that once decompression has occurred, we
should get RPL packets as defined in the spec. 

If more than one compression method exist over a same MAC in a same
network, or if nodes use compression and others do not, then we are in a
situation that is equivalent to different MACs over the same band, or
different cryptos. DIOs have to be sent twice, etc.

So people will have to be careful as to when and how they deploy new
stuff. It is probably preferable to limit the number of gateways that
have to repeat their multicast DIOs over multiple networks. But that's a
deployment issue.

Cheers,

Pascal

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email