[Roll] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-roll-asymlink-00.txt
"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Mon, 17 October 2011 10:33 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 361CA21F8B2A for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:33:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.922
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.922 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.677, BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_AFFORDABLE=1, 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 ndm0yPVuj5yB for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:33:42 -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 4B64721F877F for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 03:33:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=pthubert@cisco.com; l=2920; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1318847622; x=1320057222; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:in-reply-to:references:from:to; bh=UDo70T2tHR0kcxPZyq8M+KX6n8wk5aRFeVHlzyVj0UI=; b=OY0VkLJMgHVIBFIWXd+gDreGRVuTtHJ8ls+C6zAXclDA5mSsU9+991vb Q+Ygh7QSti6swxoQDYK2zOUL/ydEpOEATmKEQvF7egVB8tuoLi+aDXDol R1MNHb031neLg1aQdPnZcaMcDfRSMUB7uzUKeZ3fGebniqk7QEg7HKdJR w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgIFAOgDnE6Q/khR/2dsb2JhbABEhHWidXuBBYFuAQEBBBIBEA0EQw4EAgEIEQQBAQMCBgYXAQICAgEBRAcBAQUDAQEEEwganCgBjEeRRIEwhUQzYQSZLIwm
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,358,1315180800"; d="scan'208";a="119271104"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.72.81]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Oct 2011 10:33:39 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-201.cisco.com (xbh-ams-201.cisco.com [144.254.75.7]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p9HAXcux004830 for <roll@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:33:38 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-108.cisco.com ([144.254.74.83]) by xbh-ams-201.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:33:38 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 12:33:37 +0200
Message-ID: <BDF2740C082F6942820D95BAEB9E1A84268510@XMB-AMS-108.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111017100411.16096.53541.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-roll-asymlink-00.txt
Thread-Index: AcyMtCKH1qQZiHY4Sy2TQWOWlPUZQwAAJfkw
References: <20111017100411.16096.53541.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: roll WG <roll@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Oct 2011 10:33:38.0719 (UTC) FILETIME=[3B82A2F0:01CC8CB8]
Subject: [Roll] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-roll-asymlink-00.txt
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, 17 Oct 2011 10:33:43 -0000
Dear WG: During the elaboration of RPL draft, RPL ticket #32 was opened to cover Asymmetric Links. Richard in particular suggested to "Add a flag to Routing Metric/Constraint to indicate whether the path metric represents the upward (flag = 0) or downward (flag = 1) metric. The flag would only be meaningful for path metrics that are aggregations of potentially asymmetric link metrics, such as latency or link quality". The group did not express enough interest at the time to make that feature a core feature of the protocol. Still, there are specific cases of strongly asymmetrical links where an optimization would be useful when affordable. This popped up again recently during the bi-weekly discussion between the authors of the industrial applicability draft. So we decided that I should raise the question again to the group, as a new optimization. This draft suggested as we discussed long ago to make 2 DODAGs, one optimized for upwards traffic and one for downwards, and then couple them. What do you think? Pascal -----Original Message----- From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] Sent: lundi 17 octobre 2011 12:04 To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) Cc: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) Subject: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-roll-asymlink-00.txt A new version of I-D, draft-thubert-roll-asymlink-00.txt has been successfully submitted by Pascal Thubert and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-thubert-roll-asymlink Revision: 00 Title: RPL adaptation for asymmetrical links Creation date: 2011-10-17 WG ID: Individual Submission Number of pages: 9 Abstract: The Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks defines a generic Distance Vector protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks, many of which exhibit strongly asymmetrical characteristics. This draft proposes an extension for that optimizes RPL operations whereby upwards and downwards direction-optimized RPL instances are associated. The IETF Secretariat
- [Roll] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thu… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [Roll] New Version Notification for draft-thu… C Chauvenet
- Re: [Roll] New Version Notification fordraft-thub… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)