Re: [Roll] [6tisch] [6lo] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6lo-routing-dispatch-00.txt

"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Tue, 02 December 2014 16:28 UTC

Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE8C51A1C06; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:28:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 LNuZRXmEr54X; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:28:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC74C1A1BFB; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 08:28:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2792; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1417537728; x=1418747328; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=LMJ93jKACRzAzZy/+VXycnQt/C3KIe/GKauSpyEE+a8=; b=XeAtnHSilBGmGfIXIBs9QjpZIrDIEhyAND4bkHYlEWMDN8J4oCAI0Aml MurrWIsR1xdiqOK4MSEXwwBtFWAoygW88IcT1ukUA3V7WX6goe1mY4xgA /2GMr+L4929B7w6g1tT8CgPi8j9Q8jiF9fvhasws/d3hEa1NJ0NY4vUoT A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgwJAG3nfVStJA2N/2dsb2JhbABbgwdSWQSDAcFlghwKhh8CHIEGFgEBAQEBfYQCAQEBBAEBASAROgkCDAQCAQYCEQQBAQECAgYZBAMCAgIlCxQBBwEIAgQBDQUIiDgNom+cbZZlAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEwSBK452DBExBwaCbzSBHwEEjmKBf6BGgjeBRG+BBkCBAQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,501,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="101942026"
Received: from alln-core-8.cisco.com ([173.36.13.141]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Dec 2014 16:28:47 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com [173.37.183.86]) by alln-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id sB2GSlhR003626 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 2 Dec 2014 16:28:47 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([169.254.1.182]) by xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com ([173.37.183.86]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 2 Dec 2014 10:28:47 -0600
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com>
Thread-Topic: [Roll] [6tisch] [6lo] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6lo-routing-dispatch-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHQDfKgO7xFn46TMk+1F4HGj8l9D5x8fVVw
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 16:28:46 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 16:28:00 +0000
Message-ID: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848A85F5E@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <20141127133537.6084.69209.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD848A7DE36@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <5A4C4F93-2667-4510-8193-F0201219F816@nestlabs.com> <85AC0776-88D7-4019-8BB1-B0E13B9F3E64@cisco.com> <CADhXe51mQxTFO5K2bD1gYhWWW7TgjoCJzY7Un5dFru1caV2ntA@mail.gmail.com> <669B55DF-4250-4E45-B55F-03F705F4DFB0@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <669B55DF-4250-4E45-B55F-03F705F4DFB0@tzi.org>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.155.144.155]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/ybqQmsWLcfzNyXcSrvKeE8SBe8o
Cc: "6tisch@ietf.org" <6tisch@ietf.org>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [6tisch] [6lo] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-6lo-routing-dispatch-00.txt
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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, 02 Dec 2014 16:28:50 -0000

+1

I wanted to answer James when I saw this. 
My answer would have been the exact same though I would certainly have failed to express it so well.

Thanks Carsten.

Pascal


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roll [mailto:roll-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Carsten Bormann
> Sent: mardi 2 décembre 2014 06:41
> To: James Woodyatt
> Cc: 6tisch@ietf.org; Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks; 6lo@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Roll] [6tisch] [6lo] FW: New Version Notification for draft-thubert-
> 6lo-routing-dispatch-00.txt
> 
> On 01 Dec 2014, at 20:20, James Woodyatt <jhw@nestlabs.com> wrote:
> >
> > RFC 4944 is a Proposed Standard, which puts it into the same category as
> "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks" [RFC 2464],
> 
> That argument would be more convincing if the situations were indeed
> comparable.
> 
> RFC 2464 is the basis for widely deployed plug-and-play interoperability.
> *That* is what makes it mostly immutable, not the standards status.
> (Which probably should be upgraded to match reality.)
> 
> With RFC 4944, we haven’t reached that level of interoperability yet.
> In particular, there is *no* way to achieve out-of-the-box interoperability with
> the old mesh header — there is no defined way to use it, or even to find out that
> (and how) it should be used.
> So you already have to add configuration (as in, "use mesh forwarding
> mechanism X") to use it.
> Pascal’s proposal does not change this situation one iota: It doesn’t jeopardize
> interoperability where there was interoperability before.
> 
> (Note also that we already discarded LOWPAN_HC1 and LOWPAN_HC2 from
> RFC 4944 and replaced them with RFC 6282.)
> 
> Again, I believe we need to learn more about those reported usages of the old
> Mesh Header before we can meaningfully continue this argument.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll