It was my understanding that while 6lowpan may consider "mesh under"
alternatives (layer 2 routing), it would rely upon a group like RSN to
deal with "route over" (layer 3 routing) and that 6lowpan would provide
requirements to RSN.
geoff
On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 17:39 +0900, Eunsook "Eunah" Kim wrote:
> My 2 cents are in line;
>
> > The slide (see the pdf above) is pretty clear about the scope of the "mesh
> > routing" item: in 6lowpan we are not chartered
> > to develop a new routing protocol (as in the algorithm, or the engine to
> > generate routing tables). We have something
> > that looks like consensus (just need the chairs to declare it so) on
> > *adapting* routing protocols developed
> > elsewhere. 6lowpan cannot develop protocols cuz it's not in the routing
> > area.
> > /snip/
>
> In my understanding, we had some concerns to work routing solutions at
> 6lowpan, as you said it's not in the routing area. However, it doesn't
> mean that 6lowpan doesn't need to consider routing related issues for
> 6lowpan. IMHO, to make a solution and to handle routing related issues
> are different.
>
> If RSN successfully stages in the IETF, surely, RSN would be a good
> place to discuss routing issues for sensor networks. However, as you
> said below, for 6lowpan, sub-IP operations for multi-hop delivery
> should be considered, as RSN considers L3 routing.
>
> In my understanding, 6lowpan can be one of the applications for RSN.
> One way to consider 6lowpan routing issues is to put 6lowpan specific
> mesh-under routing requirements to RSN, as RSN is now gathering
> various requirements based on different applications. 6lowpan can
> discuss its own requirements with RSN, or input the requirements to
> RSN.
>
> -eunsook
>
> > As I understand it, RSN operates at layer 3, and it is arguing that there is
> > room for another multi-hop routing WG in the
> > routing area. Perhaps MANET can't really satisfy requirements for wireless
> > sensors. Whether this is solved by
> > integrating the RSN charter/deliverables into a re-chartered MANET, or by
> > starting a new WG,
> > from 6lowpan's point of view, 6lowpan can benefit from the resultant
> > protocols.
> > Of course, adaptation from layer 3 to sub-IP operation will be required,
> > along the lines of the
> > existing independent submissions in 6lowpan.
> > My 2 motes (hopefully one day those will cost 1 cent each...)
> >
> > -gabriel
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Dominik Kaspar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: Geoff Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2007 9:17:11 PM
> > Subject: Re: [RSN] The need for RSN
> >
> > Geoff,
> >
> > As far as I know, there has not been any consensus yet to what is in
> > the scope of 6lowpan and what is not. But concering the RSN/R2LN
> > efforts, it would be favorable to find consensus as soon as possible,
> > so that it's clear where to dedicate new work to.
> >
> > Dominik
> >
> > On 6/8/07, Geoff Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I would like to reiterate that I think that the work RSN group has
> > > suggested taking on is very important to my working group - 6lowpan.
> > >
> > > Our working group is looking to recharter and the scope of the work will
> > > be focused on issues related to interoperability for 6lowpan networks.
> > > This include things like MIC identifiers, alternative mesh headers,
> > > security, ...
> > >
> > > What is not in the scope is routing. I think the RSN concept is
> > > important in that the devices we are anticipating have significant
> > > constraints (power, memory, processing) and as such the current set of
> > > protocols and development is probably not appropriate for these types of
> > > devices.
> > >
> > > geoff
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > RSN mailing list
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RSN mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RSN mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
