Dear Sandra. Thanks for your comments.
I agree your comments. At the LP-WAN BoF, I was also there. In the 6lo use cases document, we tried to describe the use cases that are related to IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes. I am not sure how the current LP-WAN technologies are related to IPv6 and 6lo technologies. In the next revision, we will look at the LP-WAN technologies more detail and try to include the LP-WAN technologies. If you have related contents, it is appreciate to help. Best regards. Yong-Geun. On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:31 AM, Sandra Céspedes U. <[email protected] > wrote: > Dear Yong-Geun > > I have a comment regarding this draft: > > It seems to me that all the use cases presented in the document are for > "short-range" technologies, that would easily follow in the PAN category. > Although most of the current work done in 6lo concentrates in such > technologies, there is no limitation in the scope that indicates that > low-power wide area technologies cannot be considered. I'm referring to > technologies that were discussed during the LP-WAN BOF (they even have a > shared file with an initial list of technologies in goo.gl/S3uSPU > <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n7cXN4_VuI8imy8MG3-fHjl9FNiNvYfdB4txN4hDQ-w/edit#heading=h.g3u16990965f>). > > > Why aren't we looking into those technologies as 6lo use-cases? I suggest > that if not all the technologies, some examples should relate to LP-WAN > technologies, since they are also restricted networks (some argue that even > more constrained than Low-PAN technologies) and also need IPv6-over-foo > definitions. > > Looking forward to your opinion. > > Regards, > Sandra Céspedes > > > On 07-04-2016 22:14, Yong-Geun Hong wrote: > > Dear Michael. > > Thanks for your valuable comments. > > I totally agree your comments and it is aligned with other comments in the > 6lo WG meeting today. > > I will keep in mind your comments and try to revise the document as you > pointed. > > Best regards. > > Yong-Geun. > > > On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 7:20 AM, Michael Richardson < > <[email protected]>[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> I scanned the document quickly during the presentation today. >> >> It seems like it might be a useful document to have; >> I'm thinking that 6lowpan maybe already did such a thing? If so, it's old. >> >> If the purpose is to market/educate outsiders then I see the point, and >> let's >> do that. We regularily don't explain ourselves well enough. This >> document >> should be augmented with a set of slides that explain (in pictures) the >> deployment scenarios indicated. I would find that useful when I explain >> things to outsiders if I can find pictures and diagrams for technologies >> which I'm not otherwise intimate with. >> >> (If it's just for us, then I don't think it's useful as is) >> >> >> -- >> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works >> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 6lo mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > 6lo mailing [email protected]https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo > > > > -- > > Sandra L. Céspedes, Ph.D. | Profesora Asistente > Departamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica > Universidad de Chile > Av. Tupper 2007, Santiago, Chile. 8370451 > Tel. +56 (2) 29784093 | Of. 504 > URL: http://www.cec.uchile.cl/~scespedes > > > > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > Virus-free. > www.avast.com > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> > > _______________________________________________ > 6lo mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo > >
_______________________________________________ 6lo mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
