Re: [6lo] instance ID in rfc6775 update

[Pascal Thubert (pthubert)]

Dear all :

I just published -19 including this change and to my best knowledge, the draft 
now incorporates all that was reported so far.

Cheers,

Pascal



From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Sent: jeudi 12 avril 2018 16:23
To: 6lo@ietf.org
Cc: Yan Filyurin ; Tony Przygienda ; 
draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-upd...@ietf.org
Subject: RE: instance ID in rfc6775 update

Hi again

A proposed text would be like:


   0   1   2   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  | Type  | Length|Status |Opaque |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |  Rsvd | I |R|T| TID   | Registration Lifetime |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   |
 Registration Ownership Verifier ...
  |   |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

.

Opaque:
   One-byte Opaque field; this is an octet that ND does not need to process
   but that the 6LN wishes the 6LR to pass transparently to another process.
I:
   Two-bit Integer: A value of zero indicates that the Opaque field carries
   an abstract index that is used to decide in which routing topology the
   address is expected to be injected. In that case, the Opaque field is
   passed to a routing process with the indication that this is a topology
   information and the value of 0 indicates default. All other values are
   reserved.


Does that work?

Pascal

From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Sent: jeudi 12 avril 2018 15:40
To: 6lo@ietf.org
Cc: Yan Filyurin >; Tony Przygienda 
>; 
draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-upd...@ietf.org
Subject: instance ID in rfc6775 update

Dear all :

During a conversation on the RIFT protocol it appeared that there are use cases 
in RIFT to support host mobility with rfc6775-update.
There is a caveat, though, which is in fact common with RPL. Both cases need a 
concept of multi topology routing.
In the case of RPL, the topology is indexed by an instance ID. In the case of 
RIFT, there is a need for an index to a RIB, so one octet is probably enough.
A suggestion is thus to use the reserved octet in the ARO to carry an instance 
ID, and use a bit to signal that this is what that field does, in case there is 
a need later to overload it with something else.

I understand this is coming late in the process; but then there is no logic 
associated to the change, this is just passing on an additional information 
that is useful for more than one candidate protocol.

Please let me know if there is an issue pursuing this. If there is no 
opposition, my plan it currently to add this in rev-19.

All the best,

Pascal
___
6lo mailing list
6lo@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo

[6lo] I-D Action: draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-19.txt

[internet-drafts]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained 
Nodes WG of the IETF.

Title   : Registration Extensions for 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery
Authors : Pascal Thubert
  Erik Nordmark
  Samita Chakrabarti
  Charles E. Perkins
Filename: draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-19.txt
Pages   : 44
Date: 2018-04-23

Abstract:
   This specification updates RFC 6775 - 6LoWPAN Neighbor Discovery, to
   clarify the role of the protocol as a registration technique,
   simplify the registration operation in 6LoWPAN routers, as well as to
   provide enhancements to the registration capabilities and mobility
   detection for different network topologies including the backbone
   routers performing proxy Neighbor Discovery in a low power network.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-19
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-19

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6lo-rfc6775-update-19


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

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

___
6lo mailing list
6lo@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo