Re: [Roll] [6lo] WGLC for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-03

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Thu, 14 August 2014 20:18 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 262311A0669; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:18:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 PKmL3VfYHoGq; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x231.google.com (mail-pa0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F8461A04F6; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id hz1so2236839pad.22 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oZoafNr5dvMw+i6ytj/Ldm3HhBEb5Zcr1opC1Ez7pfw=; b=ncoSvn899pm2PK6RNT26mZKDvWoQQH2LSE9O5UPuhLQneQ/CW4YerHrZFF8ZwkqojR i8Dro0IwginHdzkTEcCurL1PoPQcQnTbUI+rBli7jRNy7EhDpnhhAhdbP0XSwLtJNdn/ wRfq5khxLpX2tNlZAi0I0rrFuoAfBIjftC3jUEAh0vj0nyCB7cbz0JiAXUMBGh2HAZJg GlgqHcDFkDzXbH0nDe9R/Kh/cC9noo0eHFW572mZLneMasiDjWtb0dOTqQ87PnOG8iGl sfCXeCL8UgU7NKH+R2WylljqnUaXcuOrlPu7RMA8o+YVpXVeYpd3W2vTVKG5brMpWx5s ADoQ==
X-Received: by 10.66.236.161 with SMTP id uv1mr6579078pac.85.1408047501951; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.23] (254.198.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.198.254]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id tu10sm6145136pbc.43.2014.08.14.13.18.18 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:18:21 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <53ED1992.1010708@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 08:18:26 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
References: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842D189A1@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <406B5D64-4F0E-4E71-BC60-A113FB367652@gmail.com> <46112F69-05F0-4E50-A808-287B06AE8E5F@cs.stanford.edu> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842D1A9FA@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <057EC9C6-07FF-409B-A3BC-3348A5F43AB3@gmail.com> <53E534E8.4050304@gmail.com> <F7618DE0-7217-46C2-93A1-CE050085E7AB@employees.org> <53E926EB.9000505@gmail.com> <CAP+sJUfDyNa=t=+C=QXy8MmvG9rAUxA0mTsXL7xSWAeLUR1qcQ@mail.gmail.com> <53EAA58D.4060401@gmail.com> <4C8FA2D5-7FD5-40A0-9D98-081BEC6A0480@tzi.org> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842D3BED8@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <6454DDD1-9A3F-4F46-9493-7307BEC01F4D@cs.stanford.edu> <53EBD028.30302@gmail.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842D3E4EF@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD842D3E4EF@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/roll/zgipC4y_Cw7DDZXHJHWpyxh7nqw
Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll@ietf.org>, Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, "6lo@ietf.org WG" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] [6lo] WGLC for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-03
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: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 20:18:24 -0000

On 14/08/2014 22:28, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) wrote:
> We can live with this Brian, 
> 
> but then I can we add at least an ISA100.11a network? ISA100.11a was designed in 2007/8, adopted IPv6 and 6LoWPAN, and uses the IPv6 flow label to indicate which flow a packet belongs to. 

I have no idea what ISA100.11a is or which organisation developed
it, but it sounds like a violation of the flow label standard at that
time (RFC 3697). If I'd known about it, we would probably have included
it in the menagerie of RFC 6294.

There's not much the IETF can do about other organisations that
misuse our standards, although indeed we sometimes need to
document such cases.

   Brian


In more details, devices are provisioned with per-flow behavior (including routing) and settings in what is called a contract.
The contractID is carried in the IPv6 flow label.
> 
> If so should we name ISA100 specifically or use a more vague description like a "RPL or similar LLN domain" 
> We'll note that resetting an flow label that comes from the Internet is a generic need is that flow label was set according to 6437, cannot be trusted to be untempered with, 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Pascal
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ipv6 [mailto:ipv6-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
>> Sent: mercredi 13 août 2014 22:53
>> To: Philip Levis
>> Cc: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks; Ines Robles; 6man WG;
>> 6lo@ietf.org WG
>> Subject: Re: [Roll] [6lo] WGLC for draft-thubert-6man-flow-label-for-rpl-03
>>
>> On 14/08/2014 07:07, Philip Levis wrote:
>>> On Aug 13, 2014, at 9:48 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
>> <pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>> If this draft is not adopted, the flow label from LLN will probably stay all
>> zeroes as it is today and the goal of 6437 will not be achieved.
>>> Pascal, I'm trying to reconcile your claim that the goal of 6437 is to
>>> allow enclosed networks to use the flow label with Brian's statement
>>>
>>>> Actually that's why I don't want to see a formal update to 6437,
>>>> because the only rational update would be to allow any closed domain
>>>> to invent its own usage. We had that argument at length during the
>>>> development of 6437, and decided against it.
>>> Phil
>> Right. I'm drawing a very subtle line between (a) stating an exception to 6437
>> for this particular usage and (b) opening the door to other usages. Since
>> 6man clearly didn't want (b) during the development of
>> 6437 I think we do need to limit ourselves to (a).
>>
>>     Brian
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
>> ipv6@ietf.org
>> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>