Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in Vancouver
Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org> Mon, 17 September 2012 13:13 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@thomasclausen.org>
X-Original-To: lln-futures@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lln-futures@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 1262721F853A for <lln-futures@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.869
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001,
BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334,
MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BKQu0F7laXsf for
<lln-futures@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from morbo.mail.tigertech.net (morbo.mail.tigertech.net
[67.131.251.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012DC21F84F0 for
<lln-futures@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailc2.tigertech.net (mailc2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.156]) by
morbo.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id BECC55584C2 for
<lln-futures@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailc2.tigertech.net
(Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E4C51BC6B7E; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at c2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.147.137] (mtg91-1-82-227-24-173.fbx.proxad.net
[82.227.24.173]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No
client certificate requested) by mailc2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA
id 442051BC6B7A; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
References: <5050CD4B.8000302@mulligan.com>
<EAE29B174013F643B5245BA11953A1BE0CFB83@011-DB3MPN1-032.MGDPHG.emi.philips.com>
<41410788-B463-4D10-8675-6FACF03F9AA6@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <41410788-B463-4D10-8675-6FACF03F9AA6@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=Apple-Mail-8AE04C67-AE12-4804-8E2D-3F5E4FEA9F7F
Message-Id: <45CBA7B9-7FAF-4BC3-85B7-DDC957CEE417@thomasclausen.org>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206)
From: Thomas Heide Clausen <ietf@thomasclausen.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 15:12:59 +0200
To: "JP Vasseur (jvasseur)" <jvasseur@cisco.com>
Cc: "Keoh, Sye Loong" <sye.loong.keoh@philips.com>,
"lln-futures@ietf.org" <lln-futures@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in Vancouver
X-BeenThere: lln-futures@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <lln-futures.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lln-futures>,
<mailto:lln-futures-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lln-futures>
List-Post: <mailto:lln-futures@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lln-futures-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lln-futures>,
<mailto:lln-futures-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 13:13:03 -0000
The IETF found it helpful to record experiences on how to have a successful BOF: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5434 Lars Eggert even is working on documenting experiences with having successful bar-BOFs: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eggert-successful-bar-bof Best, Thomas -- Thomas Heide Clausen http://www.thomasclausen.org/ "Any simple problem can be made insoluble if enough meetings are held to discuss it." -- Mitchell's Law of Committees On 17 Sep 2012, at 13:19, "JP Vasseur (jvasseur)" <jvasseur@cisco.com> wrote: > Requesting a BOF requires an accurate view on the scope, potential charter, ... > > JP Vasseur > Cisco Fellow > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 17 sept. 2012, at 13:16, "Keoh, Sye Loong" <sye.loong.keoh@philips.com> wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> I agree that having a formal BOF in Atlanta would be great to kick off some discussion. Geoff, what do we need to prepare for a formal BOF in IETF? >> >> Security for LLN is definitely one of the areas that we should address. A common solution for key management, communication security, security bootstrapping is beneficial as we can remove redundancies due to the constraints of the devices. >> >> Cheers >> Sye Loong >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: lln-futures-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lln-futures-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Geoff Mulligan >> Sent: woensdag 12 september 2012 19:59 >> To: lln-futures@ietf.org >> Subject: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in Vancouver >> >> LLN people, >> >> Here are the notes (thank you Justin) from the hallway meeting in Vancouver. >> >> There seems to be some "sort-of" parallel efforts (coman and solace), but potentially focused on different areas. >> >> We had about 7 or 8 people attend the hallway discussion. There seem to folks interested in a variety of topics related to LLNs that were not addressed by 6lowpan. If we would like to have a formal BOF in Atlanta I need to request it soon so we should have some good discussion about work items and topics for the the BOF. >> >> Please read these notes below and lets start talking... >> >> geoff >> >> >> ---------------- Notes --------------------- >> >> 6lowpan has shut down but there is still stuff to be done. >> >> What are the gaps in getting M2M communication to work within the scope of LLNs? >> >> Management of constrained devices might be taking place in COMAN. >> >> Where do we do architectures for LLNs? In general the IETF doesn't do architectures but its hard to tackle these problems without an over arching framework. >> >> There are lots of different drafts and protocols and who is the person/group looking over them and seeing if they are going to work and how they fit together. >> >> What about a common security solution for LLNs? There are different levels of security for different type of systems. It might be possible to leverage the shared medium characteristics to help secure these devices. >> >> With the layering approach we have so far....our feeling is that we have many different solutions at the different layers. We end up with different solutions doing the same work and potentially not interoperable. >> >> There is an interest in security and key management. End to end security in a multihop network. >> >> The original drafts we put out we said you can't do IPSEC. Technology has increased so perhaps we can do ipsec in these smaller devices, or some subset of ipsec. >> >> The 802.15 group has been expanding at a rapid rate- some new PHYs and MACs. Is there interest in IP over these? >> >> Working groups cluster multi dimensional issues together and the solutions to the different issues might not be the same. LLN (as low power lossy networks) are they low power or are they lossy or are they both? Perhaps we should focus on one or the other >> >> What about device identity issues. Is this in SOLACE or COMAN _______________________________________________ >> Lln-futures mailing list >> Lln-futures@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lln-futures >> >> ________________________________ >> The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lln-futures mailing list >> Lln-futures@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lln-futures > _______________________________________________ > Lln-futures mailing list > Lln-futures@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lln-futures
- [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in Vanco… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Keoh, Sye Loong
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… JP Vasseur (jvasseur)
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Ralph Droms
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Thomas Heide Clausen
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Mani, Mehdi
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Ralph Droms
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Geoff Mulligan
- Re: [Lln-futures] Notes from hallway meeting in V… Mani, Mehdi