Any update on the agenda? -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Rene Struik Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 12:21 PM To: Geoff Mulligan; Jonathan Hui Cc: 6lowpan Subject: Re: [6lowpan] agenda items
Hi Geoff: I could not see a provisional agenda, but just wanted to chime in here. At some time we should discuss the following topics: -moving the deprecated 802.15.4-2003 towards 802.15.4-2006 or perhaps 802.15.4-2011 (TG4e); -security -more overhead reduction I am not sure whether this can all be done with the current charter, but each of the topics above seems to warrant attention. Some of these are somewhat interrelated: for example, 802.15.4-2003 has quite inadequate security; overhead reduction could work vey well if security is enabled, etc. I gave a little presentation on 802.15.4-related work and room for overhead reduction at IETF-75, Stockholm, Sweden, July 26-31, 2009, at which time it was suggested to discuss this in conjunction with rechartering activities. So, now (=IETF-77) seems the right time to bring this up again (if not now, would we ever?). This could also delineate to what degree other groups should define their own compression schemes and whether security could be defined in a more coordinated fashion. Rene -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Geoff Mulligan Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 11:51 AM To: Jonathan Hui Cc: '6lowpan' Subject: Re: [6lowpan] agenda items Great! I'll add it to the agenda. geoff On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 07:57 -0800, Jonathan Hui wrote: > I can do that. > > -- > Jonathan Hui > > On Mar 12, 2010, at 7:41 AM, Geoff Mulligan wrote: > > > Colin, > > Good point. Is there anyone that wants to put together a short > > presentation on the issue with the current spec in 4944 and the > > proposed > > alternative(s). > > > > geoff > > > > > > On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 08:55 +0000, Colin O'Flynn wrote: > >> Hi Geoff, > >> > >> There was also the issue of using PAN-ID's with 16-bit compressed > >> addresses. > >> I think we almost reached a consensus on the mailing list there > >> too, but I > >> don't think there was a final statement of what to do. > >> > >> -Colin > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > >> Behalf > >> Of Geoff Mulligan > >> Sent: March 12, 2010 7:54 AM > >> To: 6lowpan > >> Subject: [6lowpan] agenda items > >> > >> so far the only person that has replied to be was Erik to talk > >> about the > >> nd-simple draft. > >> > >> Do we think that we have reached consensus on the HC draft. Should > >> we > >> move forward with the plan to just explicitly state that > >> compression can > >> only be used in first fragment? If we think that we have consensus > >> on > >> the issue we do not need to talk about it at the meeting. > >> > >> Are there other topics for this meeting other than ND? > >> > >> Draft agendas were due two days ago... > >> > >> Thanks, > >> geoff > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 6lowpan mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 6lowpan mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
