[6lowpan] LLN roadmap documents: more missing pieces

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Tue, 12 June 2012 19:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowpan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D7321F870B; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:39:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.971
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.971 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.983, BAYES_00=-2.599, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tE4crChTvZme; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:39:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [67.23.6.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0A6221F86E2; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 12:39:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (desk.marajade.sandelman.ca [209.87.252.247]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2025C8297; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:36:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id EA10398239; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:39:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from marajade.sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13E798147; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:39:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: 6lowpan@ietf.org, roll@ietf.org, 6man@ietf.org
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 15:39:06 -0400
Message-ID: <21763.1339529946@marajade.sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Subject: [6lowpan] LLN roadmap documents: more missing pieces
X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowpan>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowpan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan>, <mailto:6lowpan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 19:39:11 -0000

In a private (IM) chat between Carsten Bormann and I, we realized that there
was prescious little consensus about what building blocks will be used
where.  

For instance, I have assumed that a ROLL RPL network would not need 
the ND parts of 6lowpan-ND, only the DAD parts (if DAD was important).

That ND was unnecessary in for RPL nodes as the DAOs and DIOs served the
same purpose.  This surprised some others.  What Carsten said was that
some kind of roadmap was necessary.

In another hallway conversation at Paris, I came to understand that for
layer-2==Zigbee, that on Zigbee Controllers would ever need to run RPL,
and that the regular nodes (such as light switches, forgive me, I do not
recall their Zigbee name), would only communicate with a controller.

This in contrast to what I know the home automation/P2P people are
doing.

Finally, I wanted to bring your attention to 
  draft-kelsey-intarea-mesh-link-establishment-03.txt

which I'm told 6man is supposed to consider.  
On some networks you can not send the DAOs or NDs out until you do this.

I want to ask if it belongs in ROLL or 6lowpan.

-- 
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works 
IETF ROLL WG co-chair.    http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter/