Performance Evaluation of the Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL)
RFC 6687

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: RFC ISE <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, <iana@iana.org>, <ietf-announce@ietf.org>, <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Subject: Re: Informational RFC to be: <draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-07.txt>

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Performance Evaluation
of Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL)'
<draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation-07.txt> as an Informational RFC.

The IESG would also like the RFC-Editor to review the comments in
the datatracker
(http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation/)
related to this document and determine whether or not they merit
incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the ballot
and the comment log.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-tripathi-roll-rpl-simulation/

The process for such documents is described at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary


Technical Summary

   This document presents a performance evaluation of the Routing
   Protocol for Low power and Lossy Networks (RPL) for a small outdoor
   deployment of sensor nodes and for a large scale smart meter network.
   Detailed simulations are carried out to produce several routing
   performance metrics using these real-life deployment scenarios.

Working Group Summary

  This document is submitted on the Independent Stream

  The IESG will want to note that this document was discussed over 
  six revisions on the ROLL WG mailing list. During that time a 
  number of suggestions were made, and the draft was updated
  accordingly. It should be noted that, while most of the comments 
  raised in the working group were addressed, some concerns about
  the methodology remain unanswered.

  The working group expressed interest in having a document that
  covered simulation results, but could not decide what would go in
  that document. Additionally, the authors of this document felt that
  they wished to document and describe their simulation and did not
  have the resources to take on other simulations with different
  methodologies as suggested by the working group.

  For these reasons they have brought the I-D forward on the Independent
  Stream rather than through the WG or with AD sponsorship. The existence
  of this document in no way precludes the WG from producing its own
  document describing simulations, and does not prevent other authors
  from describing their own simulations and presenting them for
  publication. All authors of RPL simulation reports are encouraged to 
  share them for open discussion on the ROLL mailing list.

Document Quality

  The document has been reviewed by Craig Partridge on behalf of the
  ISE. The authors updated the document after his review.

  As noted above, the document has been updated after several reviews
  in the ROLL WG.

  This is an Informational document and not subject to implementation.

- - - - - -

RFC Editor Note

The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in the ROLL, 
IPPM, and BMWG working groups, but this relationship does not prevent publishing.