Hi, Nice to see Geoff woke up the list, and that someone is really on vacation (no jealousy ;-).
I have to agree with Jonathan here. A set of attributes is the most appropriate in this case, and this makes it much easier to use 6lowpan over other link layers or minimal 802.15.4 implementations. For example I would definitely avoid explicit use of association/disassociation in beacon-enabled mode. Most deployments in our experience will use beaconless mode where those primitives are not available. ICMP can be used instead of MAC primitives for many purposes. I would prefer to leave the link-layer topology construction details to the implementation, some kind of network management entity separate from 6lowpan and IETF standardization. For example with WiFi + IP implementations, the IETF does not take a stand on whether or how you configure your interface (ad-hoc mode, infrastructure mode, ap mode) nor manage it. - Zach Jonathan Hui wrote: > I'm not convinced that this WG (or the IETF in general) is the > appropriate place to specify MAC protocols. Requiring the use of > specific MAC protocols is tantamount to specifying the protocol. W.r.t > commissioning/bootstrapping, the way I see it is that the link-layer/MAC > simply has a set of attributes, some of which 6LoWPAN utilizes (e.g. > short-addrs, EUI-64, etc.). These attributes must be configured > somehow, but the specific way they get set is out of scope of this WG. > > -- > Jonathan Hui > > > Geoff Mulligan wrote: >> We have not had any lively discussion on this list for quite some time >> (actually we have not had ANY discussion on this list for quite some >> time)! Vacation is over! >> >> Topic: What 15.4 MAC functions / features should be used or relied upon >> or required by 6lowpan. >> >> Carsten reminded me that this was a topic of discussion at the last >> IETF. >> >> There were some suggestions that we should utilize some of the 15.4 MAC >> primitives for 6lowpan commissioning / bootstrapping. Others insisted >> that we not require any of the 15.4 primitives. >> >> Let try to resolve this question. >> >> [ Carsten and I are reviewing the discussion on the charter text to see >> where we are and if the text should be changed - next weeks topic!! ] >> >> geoff >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 6lowpan mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan -- Zach Shelby | CTO | +358 40 7796297 Sensinode Ltd. www.sensinode.com _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
