Re: [Roll] feedback on draft-ietf-roll-rpl-03

To: "Emmanuel Baccelli" <Emmanuel.Baccelli at inria.fr>, "ROLL WG" <roll at ietf.org>

Subject: Re: [Roll] feedback on draft-ietf-roll-rpl-03

From: "Mathilde Durvy (mdurvy)" <mdurvy at cisco.com>

Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:44:38 +0200

Authentication-results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none

Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=mdurvy at cisco.com; l=3421; q=dns/txt; s=amsiport01001; t=1255596282; x=1256805882; h=from:sender:reply-to:subject:date:message-id:to:cc: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-id: content-description:resent-date:resent-from:resent-sender: resent-to:resent-cc:resent-message-id:in-reply-to: references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:list-owner:list-archive; z=From:=20"Mathilde=20Durvy=20(mdurvy)"=20<mdurvy at cisco.co m>|Subject:=20RE:=20[Roll]=20feedback=20on=20draft-ietf-r oll-rpl-03|Date:=20Thu,=2015=20Oct=202009=2010:44:38=20+0 200|Message-ID:=20<8A977BDC5A7B0E429B0F521E8D6F91EE7AAB29 @XMB-AMS-103.cisco.com>|To:=20"Emmanuel=20Baccelli"=20<Em manuel.Baccelli at inria.fr>,=0D=0A=20=20=20=20=20=20=20=20" ROLL=20WG"=20<roll at ietf.org>|MIME-Version:=201.0 |In-Reply-To:=20<be8c8d780910140653r3743bc7ay6c4c350983e6 4e0d at mail.gmail.com>|References:=20<be8c8d780910140653r37 43bc7ay6c4c350983e64e0d at mail.gmail.com>; bh=BTgP/iVHMlRQjoTsSNj961WVaPG4rX31s7HkpJp0sz4=; b=JKrg+IsXEY5dgQnmerl/7Ayx4ce08QUJMwCv6GiSVJBcq6djk9QTnpmc mHcALyTpVSE/5xphrtqJMaG8zu+GYGYrvlm/fLZ8n4LHNqB6vWFJymQnB 3Tw9ybUIkiEbgepLwHvMlGbwHsQUU0pF02xGIs7yP1TuFd5iAef69JGQV w=;

In-reply-to: <be8c8d780910140653r3743bc7ay6c4c350983e64e0d at mail.gmail.com>

List-archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>

List-help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>

List-id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>

List-post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>

List-subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

List-unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>

References: <be8c8d780910140653r3743bc7ay6c4c350983e64e0d at mail.gmail.com>

Thread-index: AcpM1b5VyRvwmoJESSuhV+CSLpiQcwAnA3nA

Thread-topic: [Roll] feedback on draft-ietf-roll-rpl-03

Hi Emmanuel,

I very much agree with your comments. Especially with the two points below that could reduce a lot the complexity.

# Section 2

I am wondering if some of the terms are unecessary at this point. In particular, DAG siblings. Since siblings introduce quite a tricky complexity/benefit trade-off, I would be in favor of getting rid of these in the core RPL document. This could be a welcomed simplification.

Agree, for me siblings are note part of the core.

# Section 3.2.1:

"RPL constructs one or more DAGs". The consensus is that the core RPL document should specify how to build a single DAG to reach a single destination. This may be used to simplify the document a bit.

Agree. I think what is needed are just procedures to join a DAG and leave a DAG.

Best,

Mathilde

Re: [Roll] feedback on draft-ietf-roll-rpl-03

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.