Sounds good, thanks in advance for the update, request noted.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carles Gomez Montenegro <[email protected]>
> Sent: 20 June, 2018 22:11
> To: Gabriel Montenegro <[email protected]>
> Cc: Samita Chakrabarti <[email protected]>;
> [email protected]; lo <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [6lo] Status of draft-ietf-6lo-blemesh-02
> 
> Hi Gabriel,
> 
> Thanks for the follow-up.
> 
> Yes, we would like to request some time for Montreal. Our aim would be
> explaining the following:
> 
> - The updates in -03 (which we plan to publish before the cut-off date),
> including text on network formation/initialization.
> 
> - Related with the updates, we have teamed up with Michael Spörk and his
> colleagues, from Graz University of Technology, who are the authors of the
> BLEach implementation of RFC 7668 [1]. We are already running our own local
> copy (at UPC) of a BLEach scenario, which we plan to use as the basis to
> implement draft-ietf-6lo-blemesh.
> 
> - Since in the past there have been questions on the Bluetooth SIG proposal 
> for
> BLE mesh networking, it might be good to show one slide on the topic, now
> that the "Bluetooth mesh" specification (from Bluetooth
> SIG) is publicly available, explaining the differences with RFC 7668 and 
> draft-
> ietf-6lo-blemesh.
> 
> I guess a 10-min slot should work, but a shorter slot would be fine if needed 
> to
> accommodate other slot requests.
> 
> Please let us know if you have any comments.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Carles
> 
> [1]
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.re
> searchgate.net%2Fprofile%2FMarco_Zimmerling%2Fpublication%2F319315009
> _BLEach_Exploiting_the_Full_Potential_of_IPv6_over_BLE_in_Constrained_Em
> bedded_IoT_Devices%2Flinks%2F59dc8148458515e9ab4c6737%2FBLEach-
> Exploiting-the-Full-Potential-of-IPv6-over-BLE-in-Constrained-Embedded-IoT-
> Devices.pdf&data=02%7C01%7CGabriel.Montenegro%40microsoft.com%7Ce4
> ce522390ae465ade0908d5d7356d01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47
> %7C1%7C0%7C636651546827616958&sdata=YxUT2yuOeq3z03lUxy8sdyJ45Wa
> dobI0El88ENV2iwY%3D&reserved=0
> 
> 
> 
> > HI Carles,
> >
> > Below, you indicate you might have some updates for Montreal.
> >
> > Would you like some time during the meeting to discuss any progress
> > you may have had on the implementation and validation of the spec? Not
> > ready yet?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Gabriel
> >
> > From: 6lo <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Samita Chakrabarti
> > Sent: 16 March, 2018 05:16
> > To: Carles Gomez Montenegro <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; lo <[email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: [6lo] Status of draft-ietf-6lo-blemesh-02
> >
> > Thank you Carles for the implementation update of BLEmesh..
> > Great work in finding out and sharing the ble existing base
> > implementations pros and cons. That is helpful for 6lo wg and it is
> > good to know that Contiki now supports RFC 7668.
> >  -Samita
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mar 16, 2018 4:38 AM, "Carles Gomez Montenegro"
> > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > Dear WG,
> >
> > We would like to provide a short report on the status and our
> > activities related with draft-ietf-6lo-blemesh-02.
> >
> > As you may recall, while we believe the document to be ready, we
> > wanted to implement it before proceeding further.
> >
> > We had planned to implement the draft based on Raspberry Pi devices
> > and BlueZ. We actually enabled an RFC 7668 scenario with one device as
> > a master (or a 6LBR), another one as a slave (or a 6LN), and even
> > IPv6-based communication between the 6LN and a non-BLE interface of
> > the 6LBR was working well.
> >
> > However, when we tried to increase the number of 6LNs per 6LBR, we
> > encountered the issue that communication between the 6LBR and the
> > already existing 6LN stopped working.
> >
> > It appears that several concurrent BLE connections are not handled
> > correctly with BlueZ. This is a problem other people have found, and
> > as per the BlueZ mailing list, there is not a currently known solution.
> >
> > Fortunately, we have found another basis for our implementation.
> > Recently,
> > the BLEach open implementation of RFC 7668 (based on Contiki and
> > CC2650
> > devices) was released
> >
> (https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fspoerk..g
> ithub.io%2Fcontiki&data=02%7C01%7CGabriel.Montenegro%40microsoft.com
> %7Ce4ce522390ae465ade0908d5d7356d01%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd01
> 1db47%7C1%7C0%7C636651546827616958&sdata=3uZWh4AKuw11mGU2DG
> 4qAoBeYmxWYU24NT6wRsm3VKg%3D&reserved=0<https://na01.safelinks.pr
> otection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fspoerk.github.io%2Fcontiki&data
> =04%7C01%7CGabriel.Montenegro%40microsoft.com%7Cb1ab5d2296594d8b
> 0f2108d58b37a9d5%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C63
> 6567993550354044%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAi
> LCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ%3D%3D%7C-
> 1&sdata=gg8G01srzJ3e6X1IbLwUQ2mFcqhPq9Wm9FUTBry8XFw%3D&reserve
> d=0>).
> > It is promising,
> > as in fact results are shown by BLEeach authors on a scenario with one
> > 6LBR and several 6LNs. We are currently in the process of enabling the
> > RFC
> > 7668
> > scenario based on this platform, and then we plan to modify/extend the
> > code in order to implement our draft.
> >
> > Our plan is to have a first prototype implementation by IETF 102
> > (Montreal), and request to give a report in the 6Lo session of that
> > meeting.
> >
> > Meanwhile, please let us know whether you have any comments on the draft.
> > And, of course, any feedback from implementation experience will be
> > very much appreciated!
> >
> > (Note: when the I-D submission tool reopens, we will upload a new
> > version of the draft as "a refresher".)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Carles, Mahdi, Teemu
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 6lo mailing list
> > [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.i
> >
> etf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2F6lo&data=02%7C01%7CGabriel.Montenegro
> %4
> >
> 0microsoft.com%7Ce4ce522390ae465ade0908d5d7356d01%7C72f988bf86f14
> 1af91
> >
> ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636651546827616958&sdata=HUE%2FXg8FZc
> buPFtVs1
> >
> feFmsse8Cc77jPT2azP2Q5W4o%3D&reserved=0<https://na01.safelinks.protec
> t
> >
> ion.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%
> 2
> >
> F6lo&data=04%7C01%7CGabriel.Montenegro%40microsoft.com%7Cb1ab5d22
> 96594
> >
> d8b0f2108d58b37a9d5%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7
> C63656
> >
> 7993550354044%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJ
> QIjoiV2lu
> > MzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwifQ%3D%3D%7C-
> 1&sdata=fVu7RwdS7gDMMvY5N0iLrwe201uqtt
> > E58Gw3eHrKqhE%3D&reserved=0>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 6lo mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.i
> >
> etf.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2F6lo&data=02%7C01%7CGabriel.Montenegro
> %4
> >
> 0microsoft.com%7Ce4ce522390ae465ade0908d5d7356d01%7C72f988bf86f14
> 1af91
> >
> ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636651546827616958&sdata=HUE%2FXg8FZc
> buPFtVs1
> > feFmsse8Cc77jPT2azP2Q5W4o%3D&reserved=0
> >
> 

_______________________________________________
6lo mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo

Reply via email to