Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02.txt

Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com> Thu, 01 October 2015 23:24 UTC

Return-Path: <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A34071A9058 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 16:24:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.499 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=1, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 fM1pSxGSfiR7 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 16:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x233.google.com (mail-vk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::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 6765A1A9056 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 16:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vkgd64 with SMTP id d64so50491455vkg.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=9+Sz3nLhVj6zFAo1i16SoyscrkDRotB4uVMDZ2PDulo=; b=I2ceRdO3VUv9UNQsKqUFAKEZn88DzN7aLHCtQwHQziARD0H6ZTuXhHLUXbX1LCIU0M Nb2mfssR1DIWq0e+cJ7FtUEI7O6MVVANa5u8XskpZ/kD1kY11URb5c/kwVK/ulq140JZ Aiy6GgYW52Nm6a/8kabQM01IyGaRIEc98nZx9qYdwssn5EmiW7wsEP2vn1jK5qGZKjgA gZY6DvoL0JS6C6GcxFT7E6duUxSAg3v4C1QNJDIHPZ5CUC54lS9mNSNoJdQbXnODJO57 22aJt7o4NXq7zwGjwuNXqt2BT0Lu403bWEdIIh43S278Qtkp5iArEFVJK6RdhJIt2ZPu 7AbA==
X-Received: by 10.31.171.142 with SMTP id u136mr8549409vke.132.1443741894479; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 16:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.77.16 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 16:24:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E616A912-FC4D-4EBE-ABFA-17CD60CC5D79@cisco.com>
References: <20151001150947.6527.30286.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKD1Yr3Xw=ddZieF0OzU=wyqs2P5WXvRh8CXn1S2qS6WEZmb9A@mail.gmail.com> <E616A912-FC4D-4EBE-ABFA-17CD60CC5D79@cisco.com>
From: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 2015 09:24:25 +1000
Message-ID: <CAO42Z2x5mvs-MYuXSmbzRuB+f0+LY6yVmBCk1z5qm-24Op+0eQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/b8txir7yCjww4QJI8h7PI6-_RmI>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02.txt
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 23:24:56 -0000

Hi,

On 2 October 2015 at 04:39, Fred Baker (fred) <fred@cisco.com> wrote:
> Folks - I'd appreciate it if you would look at the update and comment
> quickly. The big new text is in section 4 and the security considerations.
> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02.txt
>

I'm generally ok with the next text.

I did find that the new Router Advertisement frequency section intro
read a bit as though it was a general and broad discussion of the
reasons to adjust RA timers, rather than one specific to RA interval
impacts on device power consumption.

For example, I've adjusted RA timers to reduce control plane resource
consumption on a broadband BNG/BRAS (e.g., 30K PPPoE sessions with the
default RA timers results in 50 unique RAs per second IIRC). I'd think
this reason would be out of scope for this draft.

So perhaps something like the following would make it clearer that
this section is only discussing battery power considerations when
changing RA intervals

"4. Router Advertisement frequency

There are a variety of reasons to adjust the frequency of periodic
RAs. This section discusses the power impacts for battery powered
devices when choosing an appropriate frequency for periodic RAs."



Regards,
Mark.



> My issue is that I moved too quickly. I looked at the list traffic and noted
> that it had come to a hiatus, and assumed that Lorenzo/Andrew had dealt with
> the open issues. This draft is intended to be the update that does that.
> However - I filed it with the IESG. If I need to snatch it back, say so now,
> please.
>
> On Oct 1, 2015, at 8:13 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 12:09 AM, <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>         Title           : Reducing energy consumption of Router
>> Advertisements
>>         Authors         : Andrew Yourtchenko
>>                           Lorenzo Colitti
>>         Filename        :
>> draft-ietf-v6ops-reducing-ra-energy-consumption-02.txt
>>         Pages           : 6
>>         Date            : 2015-10-01
>
>
> The changes from -02 are as follows:
>
> Added a section on RA intervals and lifetimes.
> Added text on RA guard in the security considerations section.
>
> Both are in response to previous WG comments.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>