Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast
Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Wed, 22 July 2015 12:07 UTC
Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@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 117F01A00EE for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 05:07:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.983
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 ntG-lTzebfRl for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 05:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 276621A0161 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 05:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id t6MC7hs7021101 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:07:43 +0200
Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 0952A2027B5 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:11:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31D6200C4C for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:11:18 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.84.215]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id t6MC7hbA019053 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:07:43 +0200
To: v6ops@ietf.org
References: <201507071147.t67Bl13m009348@irp-lnx1.cisco.com> <CAO42Z2x7mNFbB_w_+W+80pY+LeCAKXaOBXMmQvkcaMSWhwW60g@mail.gmail.com> <EF21B630-5D0A-415A-A93F-9058900CC80C@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2zAqMXhBZ2wa=q0wtHGhMpMWU9TSjfFyd2quiki9w0oSw@mail.gmail.com> <85CADAA2-8DF2-4A6B-812B-7A77081936F5@cisco.com> <CAO42Z2w3fOxGJHasKqYZRfGZ2u=7FnZBm+jgLtgDvfZ7HYW=iw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO42Z2z+DwOin23HQTysrZ9dNP924+LQ-vOExmJc_xZUEB4yCQ@mail.gmail.com> <228248C6-94FE-4C9C-A875-F732EFDC6601@cisco.com> <55AD3B64.5070400@acm.org> <CAPi140P+kfpyQKzCRDA7bZQRowQx_YRcZYa85hHe64g4AvsVTg@mail.gmail.com> <C5901B99-F3A7-4DB0-8216-38D95EA89D6A@delong.com> <CAMugd_Xox_zYv6oftPdAZVZGz+FYZo+Dm-QRSSn4pMEj-x1XjA@mail.gmail.com> <55AF0964.1060006@gmail.com> <CAKD1Yr2y7e3bK8oYorCBPfdBAiyEkY5JJLaE+ixGczQdDjSPuw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <55AF878E.1090200@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:07:42 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr2y7e3bK8oYorCBPfdBAiyEkY5JJLaE+ixGczQdDjSPuw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/dtwFX7hmrlQatrfmP7vg90xkQAc>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast
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: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:07:52 -0000
"Reducing battery impact of RAs on Androids"? Alex Le 22/07/2015 12:22, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit : > Thanks for all the feedback. We have posted a -01 addressing some of the > feedback we got. The new version also contains a new recommendation not > to send periodic RAs too frequently, so we have changed the title to > "Reducing battery impact of Router Advertisements". > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-unicast-01 > > If there are no objections, we will upload this as a WG document in the > next few days. > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 5:09 AM, Alejandro Acosta > <alejandroacostaalamo@gmail.com <mailto:alejandroacostaalamo@gmail.com>> > wrote: > > Hi There, > I also support this document, it's very positive to see that this > algorithm will save energy. > > Regards, > > Alejandro, > > El 7/21/2015 a las 6:11 PM, Nabil Benamar escribió: >> Hi Folks, >> >> I support this document which is very informative, useful and its >> implementation will certainly reduce energy consumption due to >> excessive Multicast RA sent. The proposed algorithm seems to be >> suitable for this end ! >> >> >> Best regards >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 4:38 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com >> <mailto:owen@delong.com>> wrote: >> >> It seems to me that the following algorithm would be >> relatively easy to implement >> and provide reasonable network optimization… >> >> >> On receipt of an RS: >> >> if(multicast_ra_time_remaining > 15 seconds) >> { >> Send_Unicast_ra >> } >> else >> { >> Send_Multicast_ra >> reset_multicast_timer >> } >> >> In this way, if the timing is reasonably close, you multicast >> a packet you were about to send >> anyway, but if the timing isn’t close, you’re not wasting >> multicast bandwidth answering a single >> node where nobody else cares. >> >> Overall, I’ve always thought that multicast response to RS was >> kind of silly. It’s probably most >> harmful on WiFi. >> >> Owen >> >> > On Jul 21, 2015, at 02:33 , Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko >> <ayourtch@gmail.com <mailto:ayourtch@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > >> > On 7/20/15, Erik Nordmark >> <<mailto:nordmark@acm.org>nordmark@acm.org >> <mailto:nordmark@acm.org>> wrote: >> >> On 7/17/15 9:34 AM, Fred Baker (fred) wrote: >> >>>> So the next logical thing to do would be to have the >> router default to >> >>>> unicast Router Advertisements, measure the rate of >> received Router >> >>>> Solicitations, and switch to multicast RA mode past a certain >> >>>> threshold to cover this sort of situation. Once the >> number of RSes >> >>>> falls, it switches back to unicast RA mode. >> >>>> >> >>>> That would get rid of the configuration knob proposed in >> this ID, and >> >>>> is behaviour that I think could be universal for all link >> types, >> >>>> rather than just for the case of wireless ones with >> mobile devices. >> >>> If it were me implementing it, I think I would go about >> this in a little >> >>> different way, hopefully simpler. I would want to send at >> most one (e.g., >> >>> either zero or one) RA per some interval (a second?). In >> the normal case, >> >>> that is sent unicast. However, having sent a unicast RA at >> time t, if I >> >>> now receive another RS before t+1, I send the next one (at >> time t+1) as a >> >>> multicast. >> >> >> >> First of all I support this document as a WG document. >> >> >> >> But in terms of implementation, isn't it simpler to >> always(*) respond to >> >> a RS with a unicast RA? >> > >> > Yes. I did not respond on-list yet - but from operational >> perspective >> > "always send solRA unicast" / "always send solRA multicast" >> definitely >> > wins in my book, and I'd avoid premature optimizations (but >> maybe we >> > can say the implementers are explicitly free to do their own >> > optimizations if they see fit) >> > >> > That said, will be very interesting to hear data from folks >> who will >> > run "all-unicast solRA", in real networks and then compare >> the effect >> > of their proposal optimizations on their real-world scenarios. >> > >> >> As background, the text in RFC4861 comes from the old >> concern that all >> >> devices might boot at the same time when the power is >> re-established >> >> after a building power failure; that doesn't happen since >> most devices >> >> (laptops, smartphones, IoT devices) have batteries today. >> In that case >> >> it might have made sense to sending fewer RA messages by >> using multicast. >> >> >> >> (*) the only case in RFC 4861 when I think a multicast >> response might be >> >> considered is when the source IPv6 address in the RS is the >> unspecified >> >> address. Further, an implementation which rate limits >> received RS >> >> packets (e.g., CoPP in a router) might also want to detect >> when the rate >> >> limit might have dropped RS packets and multicast an RA in >> that case. >> >> >> >> >> >> I do wonder why implementations haven't already changed to >> send unicast >> >> solicited RA, and whether it would make a difference if we >> have an >> > >> > TBH that's my concern as well. I think we should tweak the >> text in >> > 4861 to encourage a bit more consideration on the >> implementer's side. >> > >> >> informational document asking them to do this. >> Alternatively we could >> >> have a proposed standard which updates section 6.2.6 to >> change the "MAY >> >> unicast" to a "SHOULD unicast". >> > >> > Yeah, I actually have had the different text aimed for 6man, but >> > Lorenzo's concern was 6man would say "there is no protocol >> update >> > here, go away", so he rewrote it for v6ops. >> > >> > We should probably discuss this at the mic and get the >> opinion of the >> > 6man chairs - if there is no outright "no" on this, a >> normative doc >> > would be a better way to convince the implementers ? >> > >> >> >> >> FWIW the draft incorrectly refers to section 6.2.4 instead >> of 6.2.6. >> > >> > Nice catch, thanks! >> > >> > --a >> > >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Erik >> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> v6ops mailing list >> >>> v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> >> >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> v6ops mailing list >> >> v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> >> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > v6ops mailing list >> > v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > > > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >
- [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-ra-un… fred
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Kline
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Tore Anderson
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Kline
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Jen Linkova
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Kline
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Tarko Tikan
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Gert Doering
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Kline
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Gert Doering
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Hemant Singh (shemant)
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Nabil Benamar
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alejandro Acosta
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Jen Linkova
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Jared Mauch
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Nabil Benamar
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Alexandru Petrescu
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Gert Doering
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Lorenzo Colitti
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Ole Troan
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Erik Nordmark
- Re: [v6ops] new draft: draft-yc-v6ops-solicited-r… Mark Smith