Subject: [Roll] I-D Action:draft-ietf-roll-rpl-18.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 03:45:02 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low power and Lossy Networks
	Author(s)       : T. Winter, et al.
	Filename        : draft-ietf-roll-rpl-18.txt
	Pages           : 159
	Date            : 2011-02-04

Low power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) are a class of network in which
both the routers and their interconnect are constrained.  LLN routers
typically operate with constraints on processing power, memory, and
energy (battery power).  Their interconnects are characterized by
high loss rates, low data rates, and instability.  LLNs are comprised
of anything from a few dozen and up to thousands of routers.
Supported traffic flows include point-to-point (between devices
inside the LLN), point-to-multipoint (from a central control point to
a subset of devices inside the LLN), and multipoint-to-point (from
devices inside the LLN towards a central control point).  This
document specifies the IPv6 Routing Protocol for LLNs (RPL), which
provides a mechanism whereby multipoint-to-point traffic from devices
inside the LLN towards a central control point, as well as point-to-
multipoint traffic from the central control point to the devices
inside the LLN, is supported.  Support for point-to-point traffic is
also available.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-roll-rpl-18.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

---

From: Tim Winter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:03:03 -0500

WG,

With RPL-18 we are still working to close out the remaining concerns brought up in 
IESG evaluation (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-rpl/).

Regards,

-Tim

On 02/04/2011 06:45 AM, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

---

From: Alexandru Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 15:53:58 +0100

Thanks for the new version.

I can't seem to understand the example in new A.5 at least because it
seems to say Root has two interfaces but one RPL::Root address - this
seems wrong because it's hard to put a same (non-link-local) address on
two different interfaces.  Also it seems to say Root has an interface in
the EXT_1 prefix yet Root does not have an address in that prefix.

A picture like this would be more clear to me:

                           RPL Network        +-------------------+
                            RPL::/64          |                   |
                                    fe80::Root|     External      |
                              (Root)----------+      Prefix       |
                                |             |    EXT_1::/64     |
                      RPL::Root |             |                   |
                                |             +-------------------+

instead of this:

                           RPL Network        +-------------------+
                            RPL::/64          |                   |
                                              |     External      |
               [RPL::Root]    (Root)----------+      Prefix       |
                                |             |    EXT_1::/64     |
                                |             |                   |
                                |             +-------------------+

Also, when building these kinds of networks (RPL::/64 connected to both
EXT_1::/64 and EXT_2::/64) it is important to tell which path the
packets take to make sure no loops.  Text doesn't seem to say so.

> The DODAG Root may have learned of connectivity to this prefix, for
> example, via explicit configuration or IPv6 ND on a non-RPL
> interface.

It is important for Root to know how to route packets src'ed from RPL::
to EXT_1 _and_ beyond it, and ND can help to route to EXT_1 but not
beyond it.

Is this RPL Network connected to the Internet?  Is there a default
route?  Is the default routing more towards EXT_1 or more EXT_2?

Are nodes in EXT_1 reaching nodes in EXT_2 via RPL?

Alex

Le 04/02/2011 21:03, Tim Winter a écrit :
> WG,
>
> With RPL-18 we are still working to close out the remaining concerns
> brought up in IESG evaluation
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-rpl/).
>
> Regards,
>
> -Tim
>
>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories. This draft is a work item of the Routing Over Low
>> power and Lossy networks Working Group of the IETF.
>>
>>
>> Author(s) : T. Winter, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-roll-rpl-18.txt
>> Pages : 159 Date : 2011-02-04
>>
>> both the routers and their interconnect are constrained. LLN
>> routers typically operate with constraints on processing power,
>> memory, and energy (battery power). Their interconnects are
>> characterized by high loss rates, low data rates, and instability.
>> LLNs are comprised of anything from a few dozen and up to
>> thousands of routers. Supported traffic flows include
>> point-to-point (between devices inside the LLN),
>> point-to-multipoint (from a central control point to a subset of
>> devices inside the LLN), and multipoint-to-point (from devices
>> inside the LLN towards a central control point). This document
>> specifies the IPv6 Routing Protocol for LLNs (RPL), which provides
>> a mechanism whereby multipoint-to-point traffic from devices inside
>> the LLN towards a central control point, as well as point-to-
>> _______________________________________________ Roll mailing list
>> [email-masked] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
> _______________________________________________ Roll mailing list
> [email-masked] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll
>