IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-10 comments

Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu> Tue, 08 May 2012 16:22 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=468f8a16e=mukul@uwm.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 5825221F85AC for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 May 2012 09:22:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.444
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.444 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.025, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, SARE_RMML_Stock9=0.13]
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 wgEmzumdqYia for <roll@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 May 2012 09:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ip2mta.uwm.edu (ip2mta.uwm.edu [129.89.7.20]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB3C21F8592 for <Roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 May 2012 09:22:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ap0EAOhHqU9/AAAB/2dsb2JhbABEhXKwSwEBBAEjVgUHDxEEAQEDAg0ZAlEIBhOICQULqDOKFYkJgS+JVByEXoEYBIhkjRqBEY8xgwc
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mta01.pantherlink.uwm.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A05C2E6A8F; Tue, 8 May 2012 11:21:58 -0500 (CDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mta01.pantherlink.uwm.edu
Received: from mta01.pantherlink.uwm.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mta01.pantherlink.uwm.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LbxuiaLIxogX; Tue, 8 May 2012 11:21:58 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu (mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu [129.89.7.177]) by mta01.pantherlink.uwm.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23A19E6A92; Tue, 8 May 2012 11:21:58 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 11:21:58 -0500
From: Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
Message-ID: <1741301535.314758.1336494118091.JavaMail.root@mail17.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
In-Reply-To: <18140.1336398494@marajade.sandelman.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [99.20.249.193]
X-Mailer: Zimbra 6.0.15_GA_2995 (ZimbraWebClient - IE8 (Win)/6.0.15_GA_2995)
X-Authenticated-User: mukul@uwm.edu
Cc: Roll@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-10 comments
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: Tue, 08 May 2012 16:22:43 -0000

Hi Michael

>Text something like:

>  Applicability Statements that specify P2P-RPL MUST provide values for
>  the following parameters: X, Y, Z.  

I will add the following sentence:

Applicability Statements that specify the use of P2P-RPL MUST provide guidance for setting trickle parameters, particularly Imin and the Redundancy Constant.   

Thanks
Mukul

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Richardson" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Roll@ietf.org
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk, "Mukul Goyal" <mukul@uwm.edu>
Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 8:48:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Roll] I-D Action: draft-ietf-roll-p2p-rpl-10 comments

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


>>>>> "Mukul" == Mukul Goyal <mukul@uwm.edu> writes:
    Mukul> Hi Michael

    >> My suggestion is that the "controversial" values like this SHOULD be
    Mukul> identified more clearly with text akin to:
    >> Specific consideration of this value MUST be addressed
    Mukul> in applicability statement(s).
    >> (I'd even like to put some kind of 2119-like word in about this)

    Mukul> You mean to say that P2P-RPL draft should require the
    Mukul> home/building/whomsoever_cares_to_use_p2p_rpl applicability
    Mukul> statement to address how to set P2P-RPL trickle parameters? 

Yes, exactly.
There could be a template in the document which must be filled in.

Text something like:

  Applicability Statements that specify P2P-RPL MUST provide values for
  the following parameters: X, Y, Z.  

  Considerations for setting X.
  Considerations for setting Y.
  Considerations for setting Z.

  For example:
     The FOOBAR application scenario is a dense mesh needing fast
     repair times and having routing nodes without power limits.  
     Therefore:
     1) the X value SHOULD be set between a and b.
     2) the Y value SHOULD be no greater than c.
     3) the Z value setting is not critical.

- -- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works 
IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQEVAwUBT6fSlICLcPvd0N1lAQIfpQgAwBVrjzOdOeVUOOzksTatl9aERaIkYpkj
Dj0hEYoogjZE/jQIKG1GCJtoYLuYiQ1Lv4/dtwsnap3KUrymkDk1UdPjfbcKm8oc
chHdf4Kg+MUYO7GYeOjlAOqJ/WID9mV/9cVVB71mr+33b2vmhMcnaS6Pv+spgtOS
WTDusylkJC6nz2O+DAhjHFT9lzQGvJxfKDs/eXxU8RQK44XHymU7ZmlAV37AeZQB
R3kZtFu3v9DC/0ILHz3P6go/iO/n5phd3GUeEMNJjFrrTnyqzIrU0wvwTQ4gaVnG
L40iWlpTHxNoLwRMcvPopWVIVfzGbO7bXzcT8je/mccWaDyaPj5gLw==
=mNPX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email