Markdown Version | Transcript | Session Recording

ROLL

Summary

The ROLL Working Group held an interim meeting to discuss the status of active drafts, resolve open GitHub issues on the enrollment priority work, and plan milestones for the remainder of the year.

Key outcomes included resolving a critical propagation and lollipop counter logic conflict in the enrollment priority specification, assigning reviewers for draft-ietf-roll-dis-modifications, and outlining the future path for draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension. Work on MoPs (Modes of Operation) and Capabilities has been officially deferred and removed from active milestones.

Key Discussion Points

1. Admin and Working Group Status

Ines Robles presented the ROLL Interim Meeting slides.

• RFC Updates: Three new RFCs were recently published (RPL, NSF, and DAO projection).
• Milestone Updates:
  • July 2026: Submit enrollment priority draft.
  • October 2026: Submit draft-ietf-roll-dis-modifications.
  • November 2026: Submit draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension.
  • December 2026: Recharter or close the working group.
• Capabilities & MoPs: Due to lack of feedback and resources, these items have been deferred for future work and removed from the active milestones.

2. Enrollment Priority Draft - Review of GitHub Issues

Ines Robles and Michael Richardson reviewed outstanding GitHub issues based on reviewer feedback:

• Issue 37 (References): Normative and informative references have been cleaned up and corrected by Michael Richardson.
• IANA Registry Link: Michael Richardson will update the IANA section to explicitly specify the registry links.
• Privacy Considerations: Michael Richardson deleted this section as there are no distinct privacy implications.
• Operational Considerations & Default Constants: Discussion arose regarding why the default priority value is set to 40 and whether it should be operator-configurable. Michael Richardson explained that making this configurable defeats the "zero-touch" goal of the protocol, as it would require out-of-band configuration. Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis suggested adding a sentence explaining that constants are intentionally non-configurable to aid zero-touch deployment. Michael Richardson agreed to add this clarification.
• Terminology (Telemetry): A reviewer questioned the use of the word "telemetry." Michael Richardson defended the term, noting its standard usage within the IETF (e.g., RFC 9232) and in general dictionary definitions, and opted to keep it.
• Issue 42 (Secure Enrollment title): Michael Richardson removed the word "secure" from the title/text where appropriate to avoid confusion.
• RPL Capabilities and T Bit:
  • The section on RPL capabilities will be removed since capabilities work is deferred.
  • For the T bit (which triggers a trickle reset), the requirement will be changed from a "should" to a "must" to guarantee a trickle reset occurs when setting the bit.

3. Enrollment Priority: Lollipop Counter & 6LR Propagation

Michael Richardson led a technical discussion on propagation rules using the slide deck Enrollment Priority Problem Text (v2).

• The Problem: The current draft text states that 6LRs "must not change the option when propagating it." Michael Richardson pointed out that this contradicts the purpose of adding the lollipop counter, which was introduced to handle priority updates as they propagate down the DODAG. If 6LRs cannot change the option, the priority values cannot increment, rendering the mechanism ineffective.
• Technical Analysis:
  • A value of 7F (hex) represents infinity/off, signaling that enrollment is disabled.
  • If enrollment is enabled, priority values must increment as they propagate down the rank to reflect path cost/congestion. This allows prospective joiners to select optimal paths (e.g., choosing a parent announcing a priority of 52 over one announcing 7F or 72).
  • Pascal Thubert agreed that the restriction against 6LRs modifying the option was a legacy text error from before the lollipop counter was introduced.
• The Solution: The group agreed that 6LRs must be allowed to increment the priority value as it propagates down the DODAG (up to the maximum of 7F).
• Parent Selection Rule: Pascal Thubert noted that when a node has multiple parents, it must propagate the value associated with its preferred parent. Michael Richardson agreed and will add this rule to the text.

4. DIS Modifications

Ines Robles provided an update on draft-ietf-roll-dis-modifications.

• A new version was published in May.
• The draft has successfully passed Security Directory and Routing Directory reviews.
• Volunteers: Michael Richardson and Pascal Thubert volunteered to review the updated draft.
• Next Steps: The chairs will issue a call for a document shepherd on the mailing list before moving the draft to Working Group Last Call (WGLC).

5. NSA Extension

Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis reported on draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension.

• No new version has been published recently, but progress is being made.
• Following prior feedback from Pascal Thubert, the primary goal is to decouple the draft from specific objective functions to make the metric container extension generic.
• Remous-Aris Koutsiamanis will continue working on these updates to meet the updated milestone.

Decisions and Action Items

Next Steps

• Enrollment Priority Draft: Michael Richardson will publish an updated draft addressing all resolved GitHub issues and the propagation logic. The chairs will then prepare the document for submission to the IESG.
• IETF 126 (July): Several participants (Ines Robles and Michael Richardson) plan to attend in person (pending travel/airline approvals), while others will participate virtually.

Related Documents

draft-ietf-roll-dis-modifications, draft-ietf-roll-nsa-extension