Re: [6lo] Focusing the charter

[Ulrich Herberg <[e-mail]>]

Thanks for this information!

Best regards
Ulrich

On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Geoff Mulligan <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> On 06/14/2013 12:21 PM, Ulrich Herberg wrote:
>>
>> Geoff,
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Geoff Mulligan
>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ulrich: Why can't SNMP be used over 6lowpans?  I don't see what would
>>> technically stop it from being used or from working.
>>
>> That is an interesting question that (I think) was part of a
>> to-be-done gap analysis in the COMAN draft. The main question would be
>> if SNMP has too much overhead for constrained devices and networks
>> (both in terms of payload and stack size). Has anyone deployed SNMP in
>> such networks and on constrained devices?
>>
>> Best regards
>> Ulrich
>
> In my experience with implementing SNMP and also working with folks that
> have done an SNMP like protocol, it is certainly doable to implement and use
> it with constrained devices and networks.  In my implementation I did not
> provide a full ASN.1 compliant system, but instead only implemented a
> limited set of BER to improve stack size and I elided some of the OID to
> improve payload efficiency.
>
> NXP's JennetIP implements a protocol that is similar to SNMP.
>
> So, no I don't think that SNMP would have too much overhead for these
> devices and networks and I'm still interested in pursuing this.
>
>     geoff
>