JP, David, I would like to refer to our 6lowpan Routing Requirements draft, which discusses the issues of routing in "sensor networks". The draft provides design goals and a list of requirements for IP-based routing solutions in low-rate WPANs.
At IETF-68 in Prague, we presented our work and solicited advice from both MANET and 6lowpan folks. There seemed to be a general consent that routing is a very important task to solve, however, it is heavily dependent on the network architecture itself, and what exactly this "architecture" is should be clarified first. If you haven't done it yet, please read our draft; we appreciate any constructive comments: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/6lowpan/draft-dokaspar-6lowpan-routreq-01.txt Sincerely, Dominik On 4/12/07, JP Vasseur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi, We wanted to inform you that a new Mailing List has been set up, the aim of which is to discuss Routing for Sensor Networks (at the IP layer). Anybody interested in contributing to the work is of course more than welcome to subscribe and collaborate. To register: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn Several of you already expressed some real interest in this work and several documents (with currently no home WG) already exist. David and I posted are about to post an ID on the routing requirements for Sensor Networks (probably early next week) to kick off the discussion. What is the overall objective ? 1) As you know a plethora of proprietary routing protocols (thus outside of the IETF) have been developed and there is within the IETF currently no clear answer on which protocol(s) can satisfy the very specific requirements of Sensor Networks. This triggered this initiative so as to define a routing architecture and routing protocol at the IETF for Sensor Nets, thus this new mailing list. Note that we may not be able to come up with a single set of requirements but a few requirement documents accompanied with some applicability IDs if it turns out that a unique solution cannot satisfy them all. 2) There is at this stage no a priori on the routing protocol that could be used: it could either be (1) existing routing protocol(s) (AODV, DYMO, OLSR, Triggered RIP, NEMO, ...) (1) existing routing protocol(s) with enhancements or (3) new routing protocol(s). Possible next steps If enough interest for this work is shown on the list, we will request a BOF for Chicago, which may lead to forming a new WG. JP and David. _______________________________________________ manet mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
_______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
