Re: [lp-wan] Focused Scope for LPWAN WG at Berlin

Hello Thomas,

Thank you for your input, I think we can discuss of which are the good
technologies to study, but there is not a doubt about SIGFOX, as they have
shown its interested. Ofcourse we can discuss about 802.15.4g and the
difference between 6tisch/6lo/6LoWPAN and LP-WAN relations and differences
but there are a good collaboration between them and IETF and we can take
advantage of it. There is missing one technology, we can wait and start
with this two approaches and see if LoRAWAN get into the group, or see if
anyone of have a contect with them?

Thanks
Ana

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Thomas Watteyne <thomas.watteyne@inria.fr>
wrote:

> I believe the BoF at Buenos Aires indicated work needs to be done in the
> area of LPWAN at the IETF.
>
> Most of the discussion in Buenos Aires was about the technology that was
> going to be addressed; that discussion is missing from the initial e-mail
> in this thread.
>
> There was a clear consensus from the room to narrow the scope of LPWAN to
> 2-3 long-range technologies. There were some remarks about whether this was
> the LPWAN group pushing new technology, or whether there was pull from the
> entities defining that technology. Since then, representatives of companies
> working on SIGFOX and IEEE802.15.4g technology spoke up, expressing clear
> interest for the solutions LPWAN could come up with. There may be others
> speaking up.
>
> So I believe we have our 2-3 technologies, and I strongly suggest the
> LPWAN group narrows its scope to those as an initial set. Please note that
> a IEEE802.15.4g network is not per-se single hop, so that "feature" of
> LPWAN should be lifted.
>
> My 2c.
>
> Thomas
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Hannes Tschofenig <
> Hannes.Tschofenig@arm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ana,
>>
>>
>>
>> I would focus on the use of IPv6 over these low power wide area networks.
>>
>>
>>
>> Device management approaches, OMA LWM2M, COMI/COOL or others, would work
>> over these radio technologies.
>>
>>
>>
>> For security I haven’t seen a document that convinced me that some work
>> is needed.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ciao
>>
>> Hannes
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* lp-wan [mailto:lp-wan-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ana
>> Minaburo
>> *Sent:* 18 April 2016 23:03
>> *To:* lp-wan@ietf.org
>> *Subject:* [lp-wan] Focused Scope for LPWAN WG at Berlin
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello again,
>>
>>
>>
>> Well in this message I would like to discuss the scope of the WG. We need
>> to define the focused gaps we want to work in. Let's agree about which are
>> the subjects we want to study,
>>
>>
>>
>> I think the following points are vey important in order to create the WG,
>> please tell me which other you think we need to add.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. IPv6
>>
>> draft-gomez-lpwan-ipv6-analysis-00
>>
>> IP End to End Communication
>>
>> IPv6 MTU requires fragmentation
>>
>> ND will be configured in advanced
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. Header Compression
>>
>> draft-toutain-lp-wan-compression-context-00
>>
>> New Mechanism adapted to challenged networks
>>
>>
>>
>> 3.  Security
>>
>> Personal information need to be secured,
>>
>>
>>
>> 4. Management
>>
>> draft-pelov-core-cosol-01
>>
>> draft-veillette-core-cool-01
>>
>> draft-somaraju-core-sid-00
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Ana
>>
>>
>> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
>> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
>> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
>> information in any medium. Thank you.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lp-wan mailing list
>> lp-wan@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________
>
> Thomas Watteyne, PhD
> Research Scientist & Innovator, Inria
> Sr Networking Design Eng, Linear Tech
> Founder & co-lead, UC Berkeley OpenWSN
> Co-chair, IETF 6TiSCH
>
> www.thomaswatteyne.com
> _______________________________________
>