Re: [6tsch] 1c "Why is this a problem? " BoF slides

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;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
>>>
>>>
>>