Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter

Cenk Gündogan <cnkgndgn@gmail.com> Tue, 28 June 2016 14:31 UTC

Return-Path: <cnkgndgn@gmail.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 E0FD512D1B2 for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:31:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, HK_RANDOM_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 33hBChItalSx for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x233.google.com (mail-wm0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CC0412D1AE for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x233.google.com with SMTP id r190so27663945wmr.0 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:31:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=erM2jcci17MZZPYIazfx3hyotQF5rqfH+W9AVlQ4Ozs=; b=YR0phfm74K2VSIP4+GGMv/yphp52Oa/Vbo2QsBEZUz529dXhk5DvqO+oG1k1vay4lP Av01tOj4XdzO34s059QRuDKd6hIkji32FOduI1IyKcfIoCN34hANEKih7KB7v4XC1INQ z0fi6Pm+NS+Xpr7E6T7YwrN3letPK8FdzmK3VcjopCEdDWbbSXTzgsX7QnGSfYY7YdFz wne8c9E7OASvNDgYKGzStFWFECFMZSUHAe7oQ93B/RJeO6jAOwhSiAIbzXa1sN89+nsm GTOQSoH/jquoTIqFrTvvvVMjeoub8hNL/utXSTAV6bPVfwWIQa2ImlAUZqLFDnsyZTbJ Q3Ig==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=erM2jcci17MZZPYIazfx3hyotQF5rqfH+W9AVlQ4Ozs=; b=HnXFeQKgDXY1Gihi/029bBgSjBHbrVq1H/rLW+CmkuQnaeAXf0eatmUv7gIm9yOgsk Eq70k5HsmgBAQxGAT+SBEQqFTBgY/5uJ9vycR/D3DwClm4N/7eUgGYGdDy5WQH4kPKNl cJbS0OkFEQnBxr1EyvECvF9c5QLz8acb9pTdmQR6brGT7JpRJo7E7YRI1MxetJT2S1Rk nuZJZRUXQXUqnnZmfRkzvAmw6Ou3xkzECrGUftJRC4I9HC8IXPl4X2Jc0fJb3h//Nasn odBwC9ylX5a11HLESXLmHpuzt0gPqC+w7VMWLAxEtht4k2Gytr95i/YKPmbl2ocGPImF L8XQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tLyUPScITi7gBFl6L4PZ8hgiFmxkB4uj+HXRGghF+K7j+ooLxI76phQMuJj9eZaZw==
X-Received: by 10.194.201.102 with SMTP id jz6mr3392472wjc.101.1467124289574; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:31:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.92.124.3] (z5c7c.pia.fu-berlin.de. [87.77.92.124]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id g195sm17340369wme.23.2016.06.28.07.31.28 for <roll@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 07:31:28 -0700 (PDT)
To: roll@ietf.org
References: <CAP+sJUdRQHJhuszRLmMLoObVVELTGKAboPZpjHRV1M1t3T1BpA@mail.gmail.com> <962ecd511f1b4629bcf329790509bb0c@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com> <17987.1467118035@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <7887a2c930bd4eb3b90da72e2bbe914b@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Cenk_G=c3=bcndogan?= <cnkgndgn@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ec28f1cd-5f5e-43d9-bfc6-706a8b3116f2@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:31:27 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7887a2c930bd4eb3b90da72e2bbe914b@XCH-RCD-001.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/vZPsy9RdOE6psGltT5LDgnka4Co>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 14:31:36 -0000

Hello Pascal, Michael,

Isn't it too restrictive if we limit the text to the non-storing and 
storing modes only?
IMO other modes, like the "P2P Route Discovery" mode as defined inRFC6997
and future modes (if planned) could also benefit from those improvements.

How about:
Additional protocol elements to reduce bytes over the air and/or the 
amount of accumulated routing states.

On 06/28/2016 03:49 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
> Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; wrote:
>>     > Additional protocol elements to reduce source route headers in
>>     > non-storing mode and/or memory consumption in storing mode such as
>>     > route projection and BIER.
>> It sounds too prescriptive, as if we have limited ourselves in the charter to those two methods.  I don't think that this is your intention.
> Agreed, Michael. We can bar from " such as ..." on.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pascal
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Roll [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson
>> Sent: mardi 28 juin 2016 14:47
>> To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>;
>> Cc: peter van der Stok <stokcons@xs4all.nl>;
>> Subject: Re: [Roll] Request for Comments for ROLL Charter
>>
>>
>> Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <pthubert@cisco.com>; wrote:
>>      > Additional protocol elements to reduce source route headers in
>>      > non-storing mode and/or memory consumption in storing mode such as
>>      > route projection and BIER.
>>
>> It sounds too prescriptive, as if we have limited ourselves in the charter to those
>> two methods.  I don't think that this is your intention.
>>
>> If you wrote:
>>
>>      > Additional protocol elements to reduce source route headers in
>>      > non-storing mode and/or memory consumption in storing mode.
>>      > These elements may leverage mechanisms such as route projection and
>> BIER.
>>
>> would be clearer that these are not the only two admissible methods.
>> I'm not sure that we need to say what the methods are *at all*
>>
>>      > There is a wide scope of application areas for LLNs, including
>>      > industrial monitoring, building automation (HVAC, lighting, access
>>      > control, fire), connected homes, health care, environmental monitoring,
>>      > urban sensor networks (e.g. Smart Grid), asset tracking.  The Working
>>      > Group focuses on routing solutions for a subset of these: connected
>>      > home, building and urban sensor networks for which routing requirements
>>      > have been specified. These application-specific routing requirement
>>      > documents were used for protocol design.
>>
>>      > The Working Group focuses on IPv6 routing architectural framework for
>>      > these application scenarios. The Framework will take into consideration
>>      > various aspects including high reliability in the presence of time
>>      > varying loss characteristics and connectivity while permitting
>>      > low-power operation with very modest memory and CPU pressure in
>>      > networks potentially comprising a very large number (several thousands)
>>      > of nodes.
>>
>> I'd like these two paragraphs removed as being ancient motherhood text.
>>
>> --
>> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>;, Sandelman Software Works  -=
>> IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll