IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6lowpan] BT-LE vs ANT+

Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> Sat, 02 April 2011 10:40 UTC

Return-Path: <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: 6lowpan@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowpan@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA043A63EC for <6lowpan@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2011 03:40:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.843
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.756, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rYW1CCfK5SOj for <6lowpan@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Apr 2011 03:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wy0-f172.google.com (mail-wy0-f172.google.com [74.125.82.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FDF13A63EB for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Apr 2011 03:40:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wyb29 with SMTP id 29so4017822wyb.31 for <6lowpan@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 03:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/tJnrfDmrjXFUxCuDOPJ9t8GtDHmm/6dY8iI9y2znls=; b=rTzulIuyFytwy4zCIUSUa1cPfZLiKkddSzbaAZ7vxCCstIwESdqa2rn4kr9o/+M9c/ 9gK2xqfZqCxYCovOatec7cptASJyuognBeKFRWNANmEQxI8iLF+PZjUG0nWSmRBDu4TN /QVGOXE4eTfJX2gb0hK/0FQo8tuu+qCAKObXY=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=vyRCajDn6XgVHbK20L4k7HhPu1swc6ZecuN3E7oNGJnUNjhNWWR8TYHiR2CETPxOGm YQCM48U15hijWBvz9Il1w7Fic0QXauM/kHjHlK0p7nTXLFPJk6h10TG8zKaJewpS9vD4 WfEsi65GKq0WCbadq8TKaD9uU7VPDT46NRKME=
Received: by 10.227.197.21 with SMTP id ei21mr5089414wbb.107.1301740904982; Sat, 02 Apr 2011 03:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (bur91-3-82-239-213-32.fbx.proxad.net [82.239.213.32]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w25sm1760126wbd.39.2011.04.02.03.41.42 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 02 Apr 2011 03:41:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4D96FD62.4080804@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 12:41:38 +0200
From: Alexandru Petrescu <alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; fr; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com
References: <C9BBD3AC.12AA2%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <C9BBD3AC.12AA2%basavaraj.patil@nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: 6lowpan@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] BT-LE vs ANT+
X-BeenThere: 6lowpan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working group discussion for IPv6 over LowPan networks <6lowpan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 10:40:08 -0000

That was a side note.

Please do not call my points 0-value.

One would be tempted to easily discard some points of doing work without
meetings as of questionable value as well.  But try to understand before
discarding.

Alex

Le 02/04/2011 02:11, Basavaraj.Patil@nokia.com a écrit :
>
> Alex,
>
> Do you really have a point to make in this discussion? You are all
> over the map with zero value.
>
> -Raj
>
> On 4/1/11 4:45 PM, "ext Alexandru
> Petrescu"<alexandru.petrescu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As a side note,
>>
>> I wonder why people prefer to work for IPv6 over BT-LE instead of
>> IPv6 over ANT+ ?
>>
>> ANT+ is a very low power link layer technology very well adapted
>> for the scenario depicted in the bt-le use case scenario (page 50
>> of http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/80/slides/6lowpan-0.pdf)
>>
>> BT-LE and ANT+ technologies seem to compete in a certain market
>> segment related to PAN.
>>
>> I am asking because, from where I look, IMHO, ANT+ does seem to
>> get some tract among manufacturers of these devices.
>>
>> Alex _______________________________________________ 6lowpan
>> mailing list 6lowpan@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email