Re: [lp-wan] Review of draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06.txt

Hi Stephen,

I can provide you with better explanation for nb-iot/LTE terminology that you consider not well explained.
Are there any in particular that you have in mind ?

Br

EDGAR RAMOS 
Senior Researcher 

Oy LM Ericsson AB
Hardware, Devices and EMF
IoT technologies
Ericsson Research
02420 Jorvas, Finland
www.ericsson.com 

This Communication is Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer 

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2017 4:09 PM
To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Cc: lp-wan <lp-wan@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [lp-wan] Review of draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06.txt

Hiya,

Thanks for the review.

Belatedly responding to your various mails as I get the -07 ready.

On 28/07/17 22:47, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Here are my comments after reading the overview document:
> page 4.
> LoRaWAN acronym?

It's not quite an acronym afaik.

> page 8.
> NwkID in Table 3, is it supposed to be NetID?

Yep, I think you're right.

> p.9
> DevEUI and AppEUI
> I think they refer to the device and the application MAC addresses in 
> 64-bits

Yes, those are explained in the text I think.

> p. 13
> The 3GPP radio protocol architecture is illustration in Figure 4 
> s/illustration/illustrated

Yep, ta.

> 
> control plane protocol stack and data plane protocol stack section 
> numbering is missing

I think that's ok, a 2-level TOC is enough.

> p.14
> EPC not defined

There are lots of nb-IoT/LTE terms there that could be better explained. But if you want to offer text for some of those I'd be happy to add that.

> Fig. 1, Fig. 7 refer to non-3GPP architectures which means LoRaWAN, 
> SIGFOX and Wi-SUN are basically IEEE 802.15.4 type of technologies?

I'm not sure what change you'd like.

> 
> Regarding battery life, referred to on Page 11 for NB-IoT and p.15 for 
> SIGFOX, p.21 for Wi_SUN, if these technologies are used to connect 
> devices like refrigerators which are almost always powered up, why 
> long term battery life is an issue?
> On the other hand the use on the pets is a different issue.

Even when mounted on a mains-powered bit of equipment, sometimes these devices run on their own battery.

On 28/07/17 23:17, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> More comments:
> p.13 & p.24
> P-GW is packet data network gateway
> it is not application server, the classification in Fig. 8 seems to be 
> correct.

Sorry, not sure what you mean. Figure 3 and that text were contributed by folks who know more than me about that, but if you'd like to suggest specific text I'd be happy to make a change, if there are no objections on the list.

On 31/07/17 22:40, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
> Comments on Section 4:
> p.28
> Valid Lifetime in the 6CO it should be
>
> 6LoWPAN Context Option

Ack. Ta.

>
> p.30
> s/LPWANs nodes/LPWAN nodes

Ack. Ta.

> p.31
> staple OCSP responses
>
> Online Certificate Status
>    Protocol (OCSP)

Ack. Ta.

>
> p.30 section 4.8 second paragraph:
> add the use of a gateway with LTE uplink as a mobility solution.

I'm not sure what specific text you'd like.

Cheers,
S.

>
>

Cheers,
S.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Behcet
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 2:46 AM, <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>> directories.
>> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 over Low Power Wide-Area 
>> Networks WG of the IETF.
>>
>>         Title           : LPWAN Overview
>>         Author          : Stephen Farrell
>>         Filename        : draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06.txt
>>         Pages           : 41
>>         Date            : 2017-07-21
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    Low Power Wide Area Networks (LPWAN) are wireless technologies with
>>    characteristics such as large coverage areas, low bandwidth, possibly
>>    very small packet and application layer data sizes and long battery
>>    life operation.  This memo is an informational overview of the set of
>>    LPWAN technologies being considered in the IETF and of the gaps that
>>    exist between the needs of those technologies and the goal of running
>>    IP in LPWANs.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-overview/
>>
>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at 
>> tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> lp-wan mailing list
>> lp-wan@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan
>>
> 