1 / 12

IETF79 Nov 2010 Routing metrics ID -11 draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-11

IETF79 Nov 2010 Routing metrics ID -11 draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-11. JP Vasseur jpv@cisco.com Mijeon Kim mjkim@kt.com Kris Pister pister@eecs.berkeley.edu Nicolas Déjean nicolas.dejean@coronis.com Dominique Barthel dominique.barthel@orange-ftgroup.com. What is it?.

jadyn
Download Presentation

IETF79 Nov 2010 Routing metrics ID -11 draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-11

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IETF79 Nov 2010Routing metrics ID -11draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-11 JP Vasseur jpv@cisco.com Mijeon Kim mjkim@kt.com Kris Pister pister@eecs.berkeley.edu Nicolas Déjean nicolas.dejean@coronis.com Dominique Barthel dominique.barthel@orange-ftgroup.com

  2. What is it? • Companion document to RPL core spec and to Objective Functions definition • Defines the metrics and constraints • To be used to build RPL routing paths

  3. Since Maastricht • No request for compound metrics • -09 published Sept 6th • Last Called Sept 16th-30th • Generated about 30 emails • 6 tickets opened, #79-84 • All tickets closed by Oct 19th • -10 published Oct 20th • -11 published Oct 25th • -12 published Nov 8th • Publication request done

  4. Changes in -09 over -08 • Eased ordering requirement (implicit precedence) • added explicit metrics precedence field • Removed Global/Local bit Cases allowed in -08 • C=0, G=0 local metric • C=0, G=1, R=1 recorded metric • C=0, G=1, R=0, A=xx aggregated metric, 4 possible operators • C=1, O=0 mandatory constraint • C=1, O=1 optional constraint • Removed mention of compound metrics

  5. Ticket #79 • Request to add Link Energy Metric • Difficult to use in practice • Polled mailing list • Nobody but 1 wants it • Not included in this revision • Can always be added later, values available

  6. Ticket #80 • Question on metrics and variety of links? • RPL is an L3 protocol, meant to run over a variety of links. • The proposed set of metrics are relevant for a variety of links.

  7. Ticket #81 • Question why metrics operator in A field of DIO and not in OF? • Metrics and OF have been decoupled • Processing of Dag Metric Containers as DIOs traverse nodes is defined in metrics document • Decision to elect parent and compute rank is in OF document.

  8. Ticket #82 • Question on how does a node know its own Fanout Ratio? • Real issue • Fanout Ratio metric/constraint removed from draft

  9. Ticket #83 • Editorial comments • Thanks, Phoebus! • Taken into account

  10. Ticket #84 • Node energy (E-E field) is a ratio, not absolute value • How to differentiate "small" vs "large" node? • Either use E field, which is absolute • Mains, scavenger, primary battery • Or use other metric

  11. Changes in -11 over -10 • Lots of text clarification, trimming Changes in -12 over -11 • More text clarification, trimming

  12. Conclusions • Already sophisticated mechanisms • Multiple metrics with precedence • New metrics could be added as needed • Work completed • Next is IESG review

More Related