Dear Samita.

Thanks for your comments.

See my responses inline.

Best regards.

Yong-Geun.

On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Samita Chakrabarti <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi Yong-Geun,
>
>
> Here are some comments on the 6lo-applicability document.
> 6lo-chairs have been asked to take a close look at the document and I have
> volunteered to guide the document content along with you/co-authors and WG.
> We can meet before the 6lo meeting and lay out ideas on the modification.
>
> General comment:
>
> 1)  The document is growing too big and lost focus a bit : we need to make
> it concise and to the point in relevance with 6lo
> 2) Editorial changes are needed toward the audience who might have heard
> of 6lowpan and are interested in finding out whether their
> application/network is suitable for running 6lo (6lowpan stack with
> modifications).
>
[Yong-Geun] Yes, this document is growing big because of including of
heterogeneous link layer technologies and related 6lo use cases. I agree to
make it more concise. At Chicago meeting, I hope to have a time to discuss
how to progress.

>
> 3) It talks about LTE MTC and LPWAN technologies as a backhaul gateway
> where 6lo-type of networks might be one link in the gateway on the LAN
> side. This is a real-life application. We need to work with LPWAN chairs
>  and provide diagrams to interconnect both 6lo and LPWAN networks
>
[Yong-Geun] O.K. I will contact LPWAN chairs and try to find a cooperation
with 6lo and LPWAN.,

>
> 4)  The Design section gives ideas on different design attributes which
> are useful. Now that we have various scenarios with different/TBD
> attributes, I am thinking that having the same attributes for all usecases
> may not be required. We may pick one or two examples with complete  set of
> attributes.
>
[Yong-Geun] Yes, it is not efficient to consider same attributes to various
scenarios. I will update design section during discussion with the authors.

>
> 5) From the examples, it is not clear where 6lo network and nodes are
> running in the example. Clarification required.
>
[Yong-Geun] O.K. We will try to make it clear.

>
>
> The Abstract:
> Current Text:
>
> This document describes the applicability of IPv6 over constrained node
> networks (6lo) and use cases. It describes the practical deployment
> scenarios of 6lo technologies with the consideration of 6lo link layer
> technologies and identifies the requirements. In addition to IEEE 802.15.4,
> various link layer technologies such as ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), BLE,
> DECT-ULE, MS/TP, NFC, LTE MTC, PLC (IEEE 1901), and IEEE 802.15.4e(6tisch)
> are widely used at constrained node networks for typical services. Based on
> these link layer technologies, IPv6 over networks of resource-constrained
> nodes has various and practical use cases. To efficiently implement typical
> services, the applicability and consideration of several design space
> dimensions are described.
>
> Suggested Text:
> This document describes the applicability guideline of IPv6 over
> constrained node networks (6lo) specifications and use cases. It describes
> the practical deployment scenarios of *multiple* 6lo technologies and
> identifies the requirements.  *A consideration on use-case deployment
> design dimensions is also described. The aim of this document is to guide
> an audience who are new to IPv6 low power constrained network technologies
> and want to assess if the 6lowpan stack can be applied to their constrained
> L2-technology of interest*.
>
[Yong-Geun] Thanks for your suggest. I will reflect this change.

>
>

> Editorial comments:
> I have many editorial comments; we can discuss them at IETF 'side meeting'.
>
[Yong-Geun] Thanks. If I receive editorial comments, I will reflect.


> Other:
> Section 5 ( Design Space): Please add a sub section on '6lo adaptation
> consideration'. I can help with the text there.
> Primarily this subsection may talk about in general what people might
> think about when they consider running IP(v6) on their constrained nodes
> (i,e IPv6 address mapping, Prefix distribution, Access security,
> fragmentation requirements, privacy, L2/L3 topology  etc.)
>
[Yong-Geun] O.K. I will add a sub section and reflect your input.

>
>
> What do folks think about a tittle " 6lo Applicability Guideline" instead
> of " 6lo Applicability and Usecases" ?
>
[Yong-Geun] "6lo Applicability Guideline" seems not to bad. Let's hear
other's opinion at Chicago meeting.

>
> The goal is to hand out an IETF document to the non-IETF community to
> spread  the word about IETF work on  IPv6 IOT stack for constrained
> networks.
>
[Yong-Geun] Yes, it is the motivation of this draft. I agree that the
current texts are not enough. I should think and discuss with more people
how to satisfy our purpose.

>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> -Samita
>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 2:20 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 over Networks of
>> Resource-constrained Nodes of the IETF.
>>
>>         Title           : IPv6 over Constrained Node Networks(6lo)
>> Applicability & Use cases
>>         Authors         : Yong-Geun Hong
>>                           Carles Gomez
>>                           Abdur Rashid Sangi
>>                           Take Aanstoot
>>         Filename        : draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-01.txt
>>         Pages           : 29
>>         Date            : 2017-03-13
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    This document describes the applicability of IPv6 over constrained
>>    node networks (6lo) and use cases.  It describes the practical
>>    deployment scenarios of 6lo technologies with the consideration of
>>    6lo link layer technologies and identifies the requirements.  In
>>    addition to IEEE 802.15.4, various link layer technologies such as
>>    ITU-T G.9959 (Z-Wave), BLE, DECT-ULE, MS/TP, NFC, LTE MTC, PLC (IEEE
>>    1901), and IEEE 802.15.4e(6tisch) are widely used at constrained node
>>    networks for typical services.  Based on these link layer
>>    technologies, IPv6 over networks of resource-constrained nodes has
>>    various and practical use cases.  To efficiently implement typical
>>    services, the applicability and consideration of several design space
>>    dimensions are described.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases/
>>
>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-01
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-6lo-use-cases-01
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>> submission
>> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 6lo mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
6lo mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo

Reply via email to