Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides
Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> Mon, 22 July 2013 18:19 UTC
Return-Path: <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
X-Original-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DADC811E811E for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:19:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 Njm1NIJY57Lh for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f174.google.com (mail-ie0-f174.google.com [209.85.223.174]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 959D811E80E7 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 9so15900181iec.5 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=PZlOB8qcKG8doYJBXaZR2pd9me0Po28ELRGX034cE+E=; b=JXNGZ/DD/TZ9XJAcL7AEDo+D85g5bx3ZUVuhfbkZSsaA+Udc0kiBSQITp1JB1JQ1WV QmMl1qqFtPQpaBA2ortdnQuTnMQF+bJv7URhDKdgUZGoG2z71ZqLlpgf2v8Logk8bwo5 ToI+m6RKvAeMnvW5uI38q3/cugnlyVY8yh1YBhsHMjwHlwLdtxoSlDWv9CoNWUsNDGcp POEa6fJmAjJwuGQZCmvNghTz1B1cg47xigm3BCVy1tEtdxCkauaaQILFG29FKWWcH2YR 8ZJVZiUhiOgAPOUduwPDLQVyn/CMExhePLyL6GA7gv+EeeuUgLY13/9i3LBRAI5f+O6g zPGQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.36.100 with SMTP id p4mr19936717igj.30.1374517140526; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.171.82 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jul 2013 11:19:00 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD841380E73@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <CADJ9OA9GpdK8BCONDVNZ-ay1d+4Jnr_ea3OKEK_X6pKubt2vEA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAzoce5jHS16QsyE0Gs5CUQca6-oukOjLs6a1NZb=ckM7JfjOA@mail.gmail.com> <CAM4EQiO47BeCj3ihs_j5CM4sU5NJjvJuvx7XsBQvGNadJjr6HA@mail.gmail.com> <CAAzoce7AoLW14=BYpN5Fx4SLN_bmjiAxoOzJoRyxrPu5z_NOdw@mail.gmail.com> <CAM4EQiM2mVGHSyk+C40q_WLf0zkrkxPxunXSBhDhntGqF5y=dg@mail.gmail.com> <CAAzoce5RcroOMR6gmtYFXdkgZTiv2tfTXCJvd1gLMXxCo9+Pjg@mail.gmail.com> <51ed2a92.84520f0a.3287.ffffe42d@mx.google.com> <CAAzoce6u5sjiy9TPmEpsEx2tpi6ibOCSi2jLX1PC-UrTm_q4Hw@mail.gmail.com> <51ed4fe5.03210f0a.03c0.1e9d@mx.google.com> <CAAzoce5=2JK-9Or_x6Sp76bpy7URUUwbsy4C05YJNm+MdLYtMw@mail.gmail.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD8413809CC@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com> <CAAzoce6H3zXWWrH-i5KVJ7H5hVB4JJ_+vuXyy-J6+XkuDBLB3Q@mail.gmail.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD841380E73@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 02:19:00 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAzoce5SRey4fq0D_=jgTrB+8A=WqWphx0hqYHOZb=GzxUxFaw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e011608e4e6366b04e21db5fc"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQny5eFMFsYVtnWtcqDIFT+RGEcHyb6I4I/7Kd40wxVEZAVEpHRAFgYhNdCSkOdWUWONGCH3
Cc: 6TSCH <6tsch@ietf.org>, Alfredo Grieco <alfredo.grieco@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides
X-BeenThere: 6tsch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tsch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6tsch>
List-Post: <mailto:6tsch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:19:09 -0000
Agree! Thanks! Qin On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:09 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) < pthubert@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Qin:**** > > ** ** > > We do not intend to enable interop between foreign protocols but just to > tunnel, meaning that we expect the same protocol on both ends.**** > > 6top would just be a G MPLS pipe for that protocol; that’s the whole point > in the MP of G MPLS, right?**** > > ** ** > > Cheers,**** > > ** ** > > Pascal**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Qin Wang [mailto:qinwang@berkeley.edu] > *Sent:* lundi 22 juillet 2013 19:30 > *To:* Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > *Cc:* Alfredo Grieco; 6TSCH > > *Subject:* Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides**** > > ** ** > > Hi Pascal,**** > > ** ** > > According to my understanding, wirelessHart or ISA100.11a devices have to > implement their entire stack, including their own Application layer, > network layer, DL, and 802.15.4 MAC and PHY. So, if we want to use 6top to > forward the packets from WirelessHart and ISA100.11a, we have to > investigate the method to merge 6top with the two standards, and to replace > lower layers of the two standards. Do we really want to do it?**** > > ** ** > > Thus, instead of saying that 6top targets building a common base for > different standards (including wirelessHart and ISA100.11a), I would like > to focus on IPv6 context, and use the two standards as facts to show the > advantage of TSCH.**** > > ** ** > > How do you think?**** > > ** ** > > Qin**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 12:05 AM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) < > pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:**** > > Dear Qin:**** > > **** > > In this case we need to align time slots that are computed by 2 protocols > to make a single track. Computing those tracks would be PCE work, and > agreeing to collate path segments is the sort of things PCEs do.**** > > **** > > I think it’s OK. It’s not really impacting the mote. What’s impacting the > mote is the capability to talk both protocols to forward packets and how it > will do that (ona same interface?) is TBD.**** > > **** > > Cheers,**** > > **** > > Pascal**** > > **** > > *From:* 6tsch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:6tsch-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf > Of *Qin Wang > *Sent:* lundi 22 juillet 2013 17:35 > *To:* Alfredo Grieco > *Cc:* 6TSCH > *Subject:* Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides**** > > **** > > Alfredo,**** > > **** > > It may be too heavy to coordinate with WirelessHart and ISA100.11a. Should > we commit it? I think we need to discuss the problem in ML. How do you > think?**** > > **** > > Qin**** > > **** > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Alfredo Grieco <alfredo.grieco@gmail.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi Qin, > > There is also this further clarification in 6.1.2 > > “In that mode, the PCE may coordinate with a WirelessHART Network Manager > or > an ISA100.11a System Manager in order to specify the flows that are to be > transported transparently over the Track.” > > I was referring to this last one. > > What do you think ? > > Cheers and thanks > > Al**** > > > Da: Qin Wang [mailto:qinwang@berkeley.edu]**** > > Inviato: Monday, July 22, 2013 5:20 PM > A: Alfredo Grieco > Cc: 6TSCH**** > > Oggetto: Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides > > Hi Alfredo, > > Thank you very much for finding it out, i.e. in section 6, > > "As a result, as long as the TSCH MAC (and Layer 2 security) accepts a > frame, that frame can be switched regardless of the protocol, whether this > is an IPv6 packet, a 6LoWPAN fragment, or a frame from an alternate > protocol > such as WirelessHART of ISA100.11a." > > But, from implementation point of view, it seems to me that the NW layer of > WirelessHART or ISA100.11a has to call the commands of 6top, instead of the > primitives of DL layer defined in WirelessHart and ISA100.11a. I'm not sure > if it works for WirelessHart and ISA100.11a. > > Thought? > Qin > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Alfredo Grieco <alfredo.grieco@gmail.com> > wrote: > Hi Qin, > > Sorry for the late reply. > > If you go to Sec. 6 of the architecture draft > (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thubert-6tsch-architecture-02) we > explicitly say that ISA100.11a and WiHart could interoperate with a 6tsch > lln. > > In this sense, we move from competing to interoperating standards. > > Does it sound for you ? > > Thanks > > Alfredo > > > > > > Da: Qin Wang [mailto:qinwang@berkeley.edu] > Inviato: Friday, July 19, 2013 10:35 PM > A: Alfredo Grieco > Cc: Thomas Watteyne; 6TSCH; Pascal Thubert (pthubert) > Oggetto: Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides > > Alfredo, > > Thank you for clarifying. But, I'm still confused. Maybe I missed > something. > Can you tell me what you mean by "competing stds"? > > Thanks! > Qin > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Alfredo Grieco <alfredo.grieco@gmail.com> > wrote: > Qin, > > I was saying the opposite: 6top goes on top. > > There was a nice picture shown by Pascal in one of our weekly call several > weeks ago. > > Of course, the point you raise about ipv6 taking advantage from tsch is ok. > > Cheers > > Alfredo > > On Friday, July 19, 2013, Qin Wang wrote: > Hi Alfredo, > > I don't think WirelessHart and ISA100.11a can be added on top of 6top. The > reasons are: > > (1) They have their own and different protocol stacks. > (2) They use Timeslotted channel hopping technology, but not IEEE802.15.4e > TSCH. > > So, according to my understanding, the problem is how IPv6 protocol stack > can take advantage of TSCH, which has been proven good and standardized by > IEEE. > > Thought? > Qin > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 3:33 AM, Alfredo Grieco <alfredo.grieco@gmail.com> > wrote: > Dear Qin, > > As far as I remember, it could be also possible to embrace other > technologies by adding on top of them 6top. No need to replace but include > other technologies. > > Cheers > > Alfredo > > > On Friday, July 19, 2013, Qin Wang wrote: > Hi Thomas and All, > > The first item of problems in the slide is: > > Customer dissatisfaction with competing stds > -> no device interop, double opex > -> lack of common network management > What does "competing stds" refer to? Referring to existing standards like > WirelessHart, ISA100.11a, or something else? From the statement, it may be > derived that 6TSCH WG wants to create a common standard to replace the > competing standards. It is not our objective, right? > Maybe I misunderstand something. Please point out. > Thanks > Qin > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 12:10 AM, Thomas Watteyne > <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu> wrote: > All, > > FYI, I pushed the 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides we modified live > during the webex onto the repo. You'll find the latest version at > https://bitbucket.org/6tsch/meetings/src/master/130730_ietf-87_berlin > > Thomas > > _______________________________________________ > 6tsch mailing list > 6tsch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch > > > > **** > > **** > > ** ** >
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Kris Pister
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Kris Pister
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- [6tsch] R: 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides Alfredo Grieco
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- [6tsch] R: 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides Alfredo Grieco
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- [6tsch] R: 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides Alfredo Grieco
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Alfredo Grieco
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Alfredo Grieco
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Alfredo Grieco
- Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slid… Qin Wang
- [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides Thomas Watteyne