Hi Guillaume, Some comments inline, bracketed by <RCC></RCC>.
Robert On 26/01/2012 6:03 PM, Guillaume Fortaine wrote:
<RCC>They are outside the scope of the document because it is outside the scope and charter of the lwig WG: http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/lwig/charter/</RCC>Dear Mister Bormann, Thank you for your comprehensive reply.From a technical point of view, the whole point of running the 6LoWPAN WG for the last half-decade was to exactly make IPv6 available for constrained node/networks. That may not take away those constraints, and if you want to sell something else, it may make sense to proclaim it silly. Here, specifically, the guy is selling a radio that is different from 802.15.4, so he's trying to malign 802.15.4, striking 6LoWPAN in passing. I would prefer to discuss these things from a technical angle, not by pointing to content-free marketing sites/slides.If you remember my first mail on this mailing-list, I was explicitly asking what you called a "constrained node". Because, to quote : http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-lwig-guidance-01 "Generic hardware design advice and software implementation techniques are outside the scope of this document."
<RCC>Of course, but the IETF is not about software engineering, it is about Internet protocols. The aim of the lwig WG is to provide guidance on the Internet protocol parts - that is all it can do within its remit</RCC>This is totally no sense. In deeply embedded environments, we also need a bottom-top approach, hence my request.
<RCC>I think such statements are unnecessary and do not add anything constructive to the discussion. I can assure you that contributors like Carsten and others I work with have a superior knowledge of what is required to implement Internet protocol-based devices in low power devices with small footprints</RCC>Especially, we can see that the people on this mailing-list (and on the contiki's one as well) need a serious course in Electrical Engineering before dreaming of designing the "Internet of the Future".
<RCC>I think it would behove the DASH7 Alliance to produce something akin to what the BT-LE folks did, i.e. produce a draft of 6LoWPAN over DASH7. To write off 6LoWPAN just because it was initially targeted at 802.15.4 seems pointless; it is applicable to any low power wired or wireless technology which uses short packets and would benefit from some header/payload compression</RCC>By the way, I have absolutely no affiliation with the DASH7 project. But, I should admit that Mister Norair made something that too few people are doing : his homeworks :)
Anyway, for those who can't see this in their mail clients: the sentence with "From" is mine, not from the source cited by Guillaume. Sorry for the confusion.No problem on my side : I am using Gmail :) Best Regards, Guillaume FORTAINE On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Carsten Bormann<[email protected]> wrote:On Jan 26, 2012, at 18:23, Guillaume Fortaine wrote:Dear Dr Bormann, Thank you for your reply.6LoWPAN *is* plain IPv6. I have no idea what the sentence that you are quoting is trying to say.With all the due respect, it seems that some people don't agree with you :Sure, some people even think that SOPA is a good idea.http://dash7.org/blog/?p=1782 "(N.B. Ironically, 6LoWPAN, a wireless spec written specifically to allow IPv6 over low power wireless, is kind of silly, because it is 802.15.4 based and hence it is largely incapable of achieving any of the useful features of IPv6.)"From a technical point of view, the whole point of running the 6LoWPAN WG for the last half-decade was to exactly make IPv6 available for constrained node/networks. That may not take away those constraints, and if you want to sell something else, it may make sense to proclaim it silly. Here, specifically, the guy is selling a radio that is different from 802.15.4, so he's trying to malign 802.15.4, striking 6LoWPAN in passing. I would prefer to discuss these things from a technical angle, not by pointing to content-free marketing sites/slides. Grüße, Carsten_______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Lwip mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
