Hi Tero,

I realized I am using
Draft IEEE P802.15.4-REVc/D01TM
Revision of
IEEE Std 802.15.4-2011
date 17-03-2016.

so it seems a draft of the final 15.4. I switch to the last one. Sorry for
the confusion.

I will check and follow your comments. Thanks!
X

2016-12-16 13:15 GMT+01:00 Tero Kivinen <[email protected]>:

> Xavi Vilajosana Guillen writes:
> >     4.5.1:
> >     1) What is the EB source address size?   Presumably the dst is short
> FFFF,
> >     but it isn't stated.
> >
> > XV: According to 15.4 -2015
> > page 65.
>
> Which version of 802.15.4-2015 you have as the page 65 does not match
> anything what you are saying. Page 65 has figure 6-6 about TSCH
> Retransmission backoff.
>
> Better make sure you have the correct version, and download it from
>
> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.15.4-2015.pdf
>
> >     2)  "While listening for EBs, a joining node set its own PAN ID to
> >     0xffff..." Why is the PAN ID set to FFFF? This implies that the EB
> either
> >     doesn't have a dst PAN ID (contrary to the previous paragraph) or
> that
> >     nodes accept EB's from any advertising PAN, which makes PANID not
> useful
> >     in partitioning networks.
> >
> > XV: This comes from some discussions we had some time back. I will try
> to find
> > the threads. As far as I remember, the concern was that the PAN ID is not
> > known by the node performing the scan. Then in order to be able to
> accept the
> > EB following the filtering rules (level 3) defined in the 15.4-2011.
> section
> > 5.1.6.2 or later in section 6.7.2 of 15.4-2015 the PAN ID has to be set
> to
> > FFFF.  I agree with you that we need to check this again.
>
> The text "set its own PAN ID to 0xffff" is old text that should not be
> here in minimal anymore. The 802.15.4-2011 section 5.1.2.1.2 did that
> to get past the receive filters, but this had some other issues, and
> this text was removed in 802.15.4-2015 and the issue was solved
> properly.
>
> In 802.15.4-2015 the issue was fixed so that the section 6.7.2
> Reception and rejection has special text saying that filtering is not
> done based on normal filtering rules if we are doing scanning, but
> instead the MAC layer will process frames are described in the
> relevant subclause of 6.3.1...
>
> >     4.5.2:  "EBs SHOULD NOT be used for time synchronization." The JN
> must
> >     initially set it's clock from the EB, otherwise it will have no idea
> when
> >     to send in its join request - see 6.2.   I think you mean that EB's
> should
> >     not be used for time synchronization after a node has K2?
> >
> > XV: I agree. We need first to join the network. I will correct that.
>
> Actually whether the node has K2 or not, is not relevant, the fact
> whether it has any other time keeping neighbors tells whether it can
> use any other method than EBs for time synchronization:
>
> See section 6.5.4 Synchronization in TSCH PAN:
>
>     Note that a device sending Enhanced Beacons to advertise a TSCH
>     PAN should set the Timekeeping bit in the Link Option field, as
>     described in 7.4.4.3, for the joining devices’ receive link so
>     that joining devices can maintain time synchronization until
>     additional time source neighbors are configured by a higher layer.
>
> Note, that there is two levels of timekeeping, first is the very
> course level i.e., getting the ASN, and then time synchronization
> inside the slot. The nodes get the ASN when they join the network and
> they gain that from the EB. This is not really relevant here (except
> that it forces the EBs to be unencrypted, even when they can be
> authenticated as joining nodes need to be able to read ASN from the
> EB).
>
> Then the second level of timekeeping, i.e., to keep synchronization
> inside the slot is what we are talking here. For that the node needs
> to use two methods described in the 6.5.4.2 Node synchronization.
>
> First method is to use acknowledgement-based synchronization, which
> requires exchanging acked message with time keeping neighbor. Second
> method is the frame based synchronization, and that requires receiving
> frame from the time keeping neighbor of the node. The second method
> can also use EBs, and that would be quite cheap way of keeping in sync
> with network, as it does not require sending frames too often.
> --
> [email protected]
>



-- 
Dr. Xavier Vilajosana Guillén­
Research Professor
Wireless Networks Research Group
Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3)
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya­

+34 646 633 681| [email protected]­ | Skype­: xvilajosana
http://xvilajosana.org
http://wine.rdi.uoc.edu/

Parc Mediterrani de la Tecnologia
Av. Carl Friedrich Gauss, 5. Edifici B3
08860 Castelldefels (Barcelona)



­
_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

Reply via email to