Re: [6lowpan] WG adoption of draft-patil-6lowpan-v6over-btle-01.txt

[Oliver Hahm <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Am Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 10:05:25PM +0200 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
> > Therefore, a more generic specification for IPv6 over low-power wireless
> > foo would be really interesting for us - and probably a lot of other
> > people as CC1020 and CC110x are very popular transceivers for WSN.
> 
> I think that is an interesting idea.  How much of such a specification could
> be generic and how much would need to be specific to each of the radios?
> Can you describe the decisions you had to take in applying 6LoWPAN to these
> radios?

for our current implementation we tried to change as little as possible in
comparison to RFC 4944.  Therefore, we also adapted the 802.15.4 frame format,
though this was not the optimum choice as we had to deal with a much smaller
packet size. (cc1100 supports natively only 64 byte packets.)

Besides, we have a different addressing scheme at the link layer and have no
PAN ids or anything comparable.

In addition, we could not use 802.15.4 at the physical layer due to hardware
limitations (neither DSSS nor PSSS are supported by the transceiver) and use a
different media access. However, this obviously does not affect 6LoWPAN
itself.
 
> And, even better, can you write a draft?

Okay, I'll try to do this and then we can see how generic such a specification
could be.

Regards
Oleg