Re: [lp-wan] New Version Notification for draft-vilajosana-6lpwa-lora-hc-01.txt

[Xavier Vilajosana <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ana,

see inline please.
2016-06-22 9:53 GMT+02:00 Ana Minaburo <[e-mail]>:

> Hello Xavier, Carles,
>
>
> On 17 Jun 2016, at 05:18, Xavier Vilajosana <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Carles, Ana,
>
> see inline [XV],
>
> 2016-06-15 15:35 GMT+02:00 Carles Gomez Montenegro <[e-mail]
> >:
>
>> Hi Ana,
>>
>> Please find below some inline comments:
>>
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> >> On 09 Jun 2016, at 20:57, Xavier Vilajosana
>> >> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Anna,
>> >>
>> >> -Why do you talk only about LORAWAN and not a general solution for all
>> >> the lpwa technologies? which are the differences and how you can adapt
>> >> your work on Lorawan over all these technologies?
>> >>
>> >> because we wanted to be specific on how to map the LoRaWAN PIB to IPv6.
>> >> Do other LPWA technologies have the same DevID fields for example? I
>> >> wonder if everything can be generalized and then be implementable by
>> >> different vendors so they can intro.
>> >
>> >
>> > AM: Well, I see, but I think that we need to give a global solution to
>> > keep interoperability, we cannot study every single detail of each
>> > technology. and I think that describing the global architecture is very
>> > important in order to define the different solutions.
>>
>> [CG] A global architecture, comprising generic components to the extent
>> possible, is definitely desirable. However, there may be
>> technology-specific aspects that might not be possible to capture in a
>> generic solution. It will be important to identify these (if any). Input
>> in terms of target technology descriptions will be crucial here.
>>
>> [XV] +1, Carles is right. There are aspects that cannot be generalized.
> E.g., an IPv6 address cannot be build from the same fields in different
> technologies. Someone has to say in a specific document what are the fields
> and how they are used for each particular technology. (e.g look at IPv6
> over BTLE document or IPv6 over NFC).
>
>
> AM: Yes for sure, but this details will be described after the global
> solution is completed for the global architecture. I think we need to solve
> first the global problem and see the particular details after.
>

XV> our idea is to solve easy and obvious things first and keep evolving
together with the other draft. As we progress we can give better input for
the global architecture.

>
> >> -Which are the differences with the draft-gomez-lpwan-ipv6-analysis-00
>> >> which also explain the IPv6 addressing?
>> >>  for me Carles draft is an analysis of what are the challenges, and
>> >> tries to indicate directions, e.g giving some indications for address
>> >> autoconfiguration, fragmentation, etc.. but I guess if we want an
>> >> standard way to map IPv6 to a specific technology someone should say
>> >> what are the bits and bytes that we should use.
>> >>
>> > AM: For my understanding your draft is complementary to
>> > draft-gomez-lpwan-ipv6-analysis-00, it is very confusing to have two
>> > documents, perhaps you could work together?
>>
>> [CG] draft-gomez-lpwan-ipv6-analysis mostly analyses the applicability of
>> existing specifications (mainly, 6Lo/6LoWPAN) to support IPv6 in the
>> LPWAN/6LPWA space, and highlights related challenges and existing gaps.
>> While there may be some overlap, I understand that
>> draft-vilajosana-6lpwa-lora-hc focuses specifically on IPv6 over LoRa.
>>
>> [XV] +1 draft-gomez-lpwan-ipv6-analysis is an informational work that
> aims to identify gaps, etc.. We tried to be specific on how to map bits and
> bytes in a specific technology which is LoRaWAN.
>
>
> AM: OK
>
> >> -Which will be the differences with the
>> >> draft-gomez-lpwan-fragmentation-header-00 which already talk about the
>> >> fragmentation?
>> >> We have a section for fragmentation, but is emptyl. When we started
>> that
>> >> there were no other drafts talking about fragmentation, we also were
>> >> aware about some initiatives to add L2 fragmentation in LoRa.  So we
>> >> thought to talk about that. Then Carles came out with his draft and we
>> >> follow it in order to see if it works for LoRaWAN.  No problem on
>> >> removing fragmentation if the direction is clear with Carles approach.
>> >
>> > AM: As with the other draft, I think your work is complementary and
>> > perhaps having a good draft will be better?
>>
>> [CG] draft-gomez-lpwan-fragmentation-header defines a generic mechanism
>> (i.e. it is not specific to one LPWAN technology in particular).
>>
>> [XV] we understand that and if this draft provides a solution that works
> for LoRaWAN in our proposal we will point to it. There is no need to repeat
> work.
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> AM: ok, I’m agree with that.
>
>
> AM: If you want we can start working in a global architecture description,
> what do you think? do you want that we work together in this definition?
>

XV: Should not we wait for the final Charter after the BoF? Many things
will raise there. Anyway, all for it, I can help with that if we decide to
move forward.

cheers
X

>
> Regards,
> Ana
>
> Cheers,
>>
>> Carles
>>
>> regards,
> Xavi
>
>
> Aragó, 383, 4th floor
> 08013 Barcelona, Spain
>
> 9-10 Carlos Place, Mayfair
> London W1K 3AT, UK
>
> *This email may contain confidential information and may be subject to
> professional secrecy. Its dissemination, copying, distribution,
> reproduction, forwarding or any other unauthorized use is strictly
> prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify us
> immediately and arrange for its deletion, together with any attached
> documents.*
>
> *Este correo electrónico puede contener información estrictamente
> confidencial, y puede estar sometido al secreto profesional. Está prohibida
> su difusión, copia, distribución, reproducción, reenvío o cualquier otro
> uso no autorizado. En caso de recibir este correo por error, rogamos nos
> lo comunique de inmediato y proceda a su eliminación, así como de cualquier
> documento que se adjunte.*
>
>
>

-- 


Aragó, 383, 4th floor
08013 Barcelona, Spain

9-10 Carlos Place, Mayfair
London W1K 3AT, UK

*This email may contain confidential information and may be subject to 
professional secrecy. Its dissemination, copying, distribution, 
reproduction, forwarding or any other unauthorized use is strictly 
prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify us 
immediately and arrange for its deletion, together with any attached 
documents.*


*Este correo electrónico puede contener información estrictamente 
confidencial, y puede estar sometido al secreto profesional. Está prohibida 
su difusión, copia, distribución, reproducción, reenvío o cualquier otro 
uso no autorizado. En caso de recibir este correo por error, rogamos nos 
lo comunique de inmediato y proceda a su eliminación, así como de cualquier 
documento que se adjunte.*