Re: [Coma] New Maillist for the discussion on the Management of Constrained Networks and Devices

"Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com> Wed, 06 June 2012 08:52 UTC

Return-Path: <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: coma@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: coma@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68C6C21F85AF for <coma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 01:52:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 9Ki3pYoB5ic7 for <coma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 01:52:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7A8721F86BA for <coma@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 01:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.56]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q568qIMF020149 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 10:52:18 +0200
Received: from DEMUEXC047.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.32.93]) by demuprx017.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q568qBG3024165; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 10:52:18 +0200
Received: from DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.18]) by DEMUEXC047.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Wed, 6 Jun 2012 10:52:11 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 10:52:10 +0200
Message-ID: <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6403DFB0EE@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net>
In-Reply-To: <20120605120503.GA87941@elstar.local>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Coma] New Maillist for the discussion on the Management of Constrained Networks and Devices
Thread-Index: Ac1DE3czJ33mESF7TOiYp7tkG5FBZQArNNVA
References: <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6403D56943@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <4FC8CFEB.6040902@cisco.com> <341929CE-3341-41EC-A472-1213B6F8C320@sensinode.com> <CAOQrqOVgtLhqqkHCbjuCaNeQzozt8DMCU2Xvg=QRZTOXpYM1PA@mail.gmail.com> <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A6403D9AB54@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net> <20120605120503.GA87941@elstar.local>
From: "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
To: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jun 2012 08:52:11.0692 (UTC) FILETIME=[A99BC6C0:01CD43C1]
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 919
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1338972738-0000425E-C033978B/0-0/0-0
Cc: ext Antonio Jara <jara@um.es>, Zach Shelby <zach@sensinode.com>, coma@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Coma] New Maillist for the discussion on the Management of Constrained Networks and Devices
X-BeenThere: coma@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Management of Constrained Networks and Devices <coma.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/coma>, <mailto:coma-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/coma>
List-Post: <mailto:coma@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:coma-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/coma>, <mailto:coma-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 08:52:21 -0000

Hi Juergen,

> I think device classes are one dimension but there are others. Lets
> think also about "application scenarios or classes" (there might be
> better terms): there will be applications and corresponding devices
> where there simply is no explicit management ever (the device either
> works or it is thrown away). Other scenarios may involve the need to
> integrate constrained devices into a system also comprising more
> traditionally managed devices. Other scenarios may be fully
> application driven and any necessary management functions must become
> part of that application.

Agree. Matching device classes to possible applications in use might not
be sufficient. A top down view for application driven scenarios would be
useful.

Could you describe the application classes and the list of relevant
scenarios you have in mind. Some draft text would be helpful.

Cheers,
Mehmet