Dear all :
The sense of the room at the WG meeting at IETF 97 in Seoul was that
draft-richardson-6tisch-dtsecurity-secure-join and
draft-vucinic-6tisch-minimal-security could be combined as a staged join
process, the former being optional in the case of a PSK, and that the two
documents
Hi all,
I also have comments on draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-03; some of
them are covered by Simon. :-)
# I put a tag for each item: [C] for comment/suggestion, [Q] for
# question.
* Section 4.2.2:
- [Q] Why must the value of SeqNum increment *by exactly one* at each
new 6P request to
Hi all,
Reading the current draft draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-03, a few
points were not clear to me:
* Section 4.2.7: why do cells only have a recommended format? I guess
it's up to the SF, but if so, this is worth stating explicitly.
* Section 4.2.7: what happens when cells don't fit a
Hi Thomas,
We are going to work on 6P again, so I'm afraid a couple of more
edits might be needed :-\
A new patch will come out if necessary ;-)
Best,
Yatch
On 2016/11/22 19:48, Thomas Watteyne wrote:
Awesome, thanks Yatch!
We are going to work on 6P again, so I'm afraid a couple of more
I agree witb Yatch: On Step 1, keep the original CLEAR command at
boot time.
Step 2 is OK for me:
In fact, the only way SF0 would detect that the node is
no longer available or that RPL has decided a parent change
is that there will be no more effectively used cells towards
that neighbour, so
Hi all,
Here is my opinion:
step 1: one suggestion to keep the original sentence explaining what
to do in SF0 after the system booting-up or restart. That is,
no change on draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-sf0-02#section-10.
step 2: +1
Thanks!
Yatch
On 2016/11/22 8:16, Thomas Watteyne
Awesome, thanks Yatch!
We are going to work on 6P again, so I'm afraid a couple of more edits
might be needed :-\
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Yasuyuki Tanaka <
yasuyuki9.tan...@toshiba.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> A patch to support 6P of draft-03 has been merged into the master
> branch of
Thanks Maria Rita for agreeing to add the term. Can I ask you to do the
edit in the repo?
About last call, while I agree with the definitions in there, we MAY want
to remove some, or at least do a sanity check. Maria Rita, could I ask you
to go through the list and make some recommendations?
Hi all,
A patch to support 6P of draft-03 has been merged into the master
branch of Wireshark with the short commit hash of 0f36cf6. This patch
updates the code based on draft-02 that was already there.
The latest packages available at the following site, "automated build
section", should
Xavi, Thomas, thank you for the responses!
I'm replying both of you in a single email to save bandwidth ;-)
Sorry for making this email so long... I put a shorter response first.
thomas> From an implementation point of view, cells that are in the
thomas> process of being reserved (i.e. 6P add
I think that we need to remember that in some cases CCA is necessary for
minimal, such as shared slots, but also when there are multiple instances of
6tisch being used by non-coordinated entities.
Regardless, "In the TSCH mode, backoff is calculated in shared links, so the
CSMA-CA
Xavi,
sure, we can add CCA among the terms.
Pascal, about the last call for the terminology draft, I believe we can go for
it.
Maybe we only need to check first if there are new terms coming from the 6P and
SF0 drafts (but I doubt, because we checked already last time), or from the
latest
That would be good.
Also: as discussed at the IETF meeting, we also need to trigger last call for
the terminology draft, which will cause minimal to be held for publication
otherwise.
Maria-Rita, do you think we are ready for that?
Take care,
Pascal
From: 6tisch
Dear Maria Rita,
I would like to suggest adding the following definition to the terminology
draft so we can point to it from minimal.
CCA: Clear Channel Assessment. Mechanism defined in , section 6.2.5.2. In a TSCH network, CCA can be used
to detect other radio networks in vicinity. Nodes listen
+1
The clear command will be useful at implementation point of view.
Thanks & Regards,
Lijo Thomas
From: 6tisch [mailto:6tisch-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Watteyne
Sent: 22 November 2016 12:47
To: 6tisch@ietf.org
Subject: [6tisch] [6P+SF0] CALL FOR CONSENSUS: sending
15 matches
Mail list logo
