Skip to main content

Routing Metrics Used for Path Calculation in Low-Power and Lossy Networks
RFC 6551

Yes

(Adrian Farrel)
(Stewart Bryant)

No Objection

(Gonzalo Camarillo)
(Jari Arkko)
(Robert Sparks)
(Ron Bonica)
(Russ Housley)
(Sean Turner)

Abstain


Note: This ballot was opened for revision 19 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert (was Discuss) Abstain

Comment (2011-01-17)
Section 1., paragraph 16:
>    flexibility to use link and node characterisics either as constraints

  Nit: s/characterisics/characteristics/


Section 1., paragraph 21:
>    and unneccessary routing changes.

  Nit: s/unneccessary/unnecessary/


Section 3., paragraph 1:
>    objet MUST silently be ignored.

  Nit: s/objet/object/


Section 4.1., paragraph 0:
> 4.1.  Throughput

  I think you mean (link) capacity here and not throughput. See the
  definition in RFC5136; could you adopt this definition here?


Section 4.2., paragraph 0:
> 4.2.  Latency

  See the definitions in RFC2679, can they be adopted here? Also, is
  this metric supposed to include buffering/queueing delay (which is
  load dependent) or is it purely supposed to capture the link
  transmission delay? If the former, that can vary quite a bit more...


Section 4.3.2., paragraph 12:
>    the path (cummulative path ETX calculated as the sum of the link ETX

  Nit: s/(cummulative/(cumulative/


Section 7., paragraph 1:
>    consist of making intermitment attacks on a link in an attempt to

  Nit: s/intermitment/intermittent/


Section 8., paragraph 1:
>    valuable comments.  Special thank to Adrian Farrel for his thourough

  Nit: s/thourough/thorough/

(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ()

                            

(Alexey Melnikov; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2011-01-15)
In 2.1:

   The A field has no meaning when the C Flag is set (i.e. when the
   Routing Metric/Constraint object refers to a routing constraint) and
   he only valid when the R bit is cleared.  Otherwise, the A field MUST

Is "he" should be here at all?

   be set to 0x00 and MUST be ignored on receipt.

4.1.  Throughput

   Throughput: 32 bits.  The Throughput is encoded in 32 bits in
   unsigned integer format,

In network byte order? (Also in 4.2)

   expressed in bytes per second.

(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2011-01-18)
1. The way the Flag field is defined in Figure 1 is confusing. The field is defined as length 16 bits, but then there are 5 bits labelled Flags on the diagram which are actually the currently reserved or un-allocated Flags. The A field and PRec filed are part of the Flag field, but there is no indication or indent to make this clear. 

2. Expand DIO at first occurence

3. Section 4.1 - the Throughput object seems to be mis-named. Looks more like Link Capacity.

(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection (2011-02-20)

                            

(Peter Saint-Andre; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2011-01-19)
Based on the reviews provided by IESG members more expert than I in the technology under consideration, I am ballotting "No Objection". That said, based on my own review I concur with the DISCUSS raised by Jari Arkko regarding the complexity of the system.

(Robert Sparks; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Ron Bonica; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()

                            

(Sean Turner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ()