Subject: Protocol Action: 'Routing Metrics used for Path Calculation in Low Power and Lossy Networks' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-18.txt)

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 13:53:52 -0800

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Routing Metrics used for Path Calculation in Low Power and Lossy
   Networks'
  (draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics-18.txt) as a Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Routing Over Low power and Lossy
networks Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Stewart Bryant.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-roll-routing-metrics/

Technical Summary

  Low power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) have specific routing
  characteristics compared with traditional wired or ad-hoc networks
  that have been spelled out in [RFC5548], [RFC5673], [RFC5826] and
  [RFC5867].  These involve selecting routes that optimize for particular
  metrics under non-trivial constraints.  

  Historically, IGP such as OSPF ([RFC2328]) and IS-IS ([RFC1195]) have
  used quantitative static link metrics.  Other mechanisms such as
  Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) (see
  [RFC2702] and [RFC3209]) make use of other link attributes such as
  the available reserved bandwidth (dynamic) or link affinities (most
  of the time static) to compute constrained shortest paths for Traffic
  Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs).

  This document specifies routing metrics and constraints to be used in
  path calculation by the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy
  Networks (RPL) specified in [I-D.ietf-roll-rpl].  It propose a flexible
  mechanism for the advertisement of routing metrics and constraints
  used by RPL.  Some RPL implementations may elect to adopt an
  extremely simple approach based on the use of a single metric with no
  constraint whereas other implementations may use a larger set of link
  and node routing metrics and constraints.  This specification
  provides a high degree of flexibility and a set of routing metrics
  and constraints, including node state and attributes, node energy,
  hop-count, estimated transmission count, throughput, latency, link
  reliability, mode of operation, or generic 'color'.  Extensions are
  anticipated should ew routing metrics and constraints  be
  defined in the future.

Working Group Summary

  No issues.  It took several iterations before we had a solid technical
  document.

Document Quality

  Good quality.  It is basically defining a type representation, so
  implementation is trivial. 

Personnel

  David Culler ([email-masked]) is the Document Shepherd.
  Adrian Farrel ([email-masked]) is the Responsible AD.