What do you mean "that we have no intention of actually implementing
IPv6 in wireless PANs". We have every intention of implementing IPv6 in
wireless PANs! In fact WE (Invensys and some other companies) already
have and WE (Invensys) have it deployed in a significant number of homes
in pilots in the US right now.
I do not agree with the wording for your suggested Charter changes,
though I do truly appreciate that someone is starting some sort of
exchange on the list.
geoff
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 20:02 -0500, Timothy J. Salo wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 17:54:28 -0500 (CDT)
> > From: "Timothy J. Salo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: [6lowpan] Working Group Charter
> >
> > ... I suggest replacing the first three paragraphs ...
>
> Oops, I forgot a paragraph.
>
> > - - - - - -
> >
> > IEEE 802.15.4 wireless personal-area networks, (wireless PANs), are
> > dramatically different than the environments in which IP is
> > traditionally deployed.
> > [...]
>
> o In many markets, minimizing the cost of wireless PAN nodes
> is critical. For example, the difference in cost between
> 32 KB of ROM and 64 KB of ROM may make the difference between
> a product that is competitive and one that is not. Of course,
> this extra 32 KB of RAM will reduce the battery life of the
> node, as well.
>
> - - - - - -
>
> Sooner or later, someone will figure out that we have no intention of
> actually implementing IPv6 in wireless PANs, (e.g., mobile IP, IPsec,
> a bunch of MIBs, etc.). We should be prepared to explain why.
>
> [Speaking of MIBs, will wireless PAN/IP gateways have MIBs?]
>
> -tjs
>
> _______________________________________________
> 6lowpan mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
