Re: [Iot-onboarding] Some thoughts about iot-onboarding

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Thu, 28 March 2019 14:58 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E0912001B for <iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f3wZsWfipUVP for <iot-onboarding@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [176.58.120.209]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83F17120004 for <iot-onboarding@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 07:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (dhcp-94ab.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.148.171]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 319021F47E; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:58:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 459172D2B; Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:58:26 +0100 (CET)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
cc: iot-onboarding@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <20190327134605.zf262jvchocf3hpu@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <20190327134605.zf262jvchocf3hpu@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> message dated "Wed, 27 Mar 2019 14:46:05 +0100."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <6444.1553785106.1@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:58:26 +0100
Message-ID: <6445.1553785106@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iot-onboarding/3WiJjUXGLzUf20-kT5R8nn3lVJ8>
Subject: Re: [Iot-onboarding] Some thoughts about iot-onboarding
X-BeenThere: iot-onboarding@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IoT onboarding mechanisms <iot-onboarding.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iot-onboarding>, <mailto:iot-onboarding-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iot-onboarding/>
List-Post: <mailto:iot-onboarding@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iot-onboarding-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iot-onboarding>, <mailto:iot-onboarding-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 14:58:26 -0000

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
    > One simple way to scope the amount of work for the survey output is to
    > determine what specific apects we want to describe. The table from
    > eliot is very comprehensive and would be a lot of work to complete in a
    > document format.

    > The aspects i think we want to describe are i think what we would like
    > to use as input to 2nd milestones. For example the drafts brought
    > forward in ANIMA could be 2nd round milestones, they need to achieve
    > certain goals, and we do for example want to know that all their
    > proposed work is well spent, e.g.: there are no pre-existing onboarding
    > protocols that cold be used to do what they want to do. Aka: milestone
    > 1 survey could justification reference for the milestone 2 docs.

    > Just one thought of how to approach. I am also happy to step back from
    > the survey side as an actual milestone deliverable, but concentrate on
    > progressing the likely most simple WiFi onboarding we think we need,
    > and keep work on survey as lightweight as possible (github only).

I don't think that the survey has value in itself.

The purpose is to be able to discern some critical categories/pivot points
that we can use to inform ourselves as to which things belong in which WGs
(or even within or without the IETF).

And, so that people will not re-invent new wheels.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [