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

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Tue, 03 October 2017 13:08 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6461E1321BB for <lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:08:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 VGffP6WwGCJY for <lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47D511345BE for <lp-wan@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 06:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BD55BF74; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 14:08:52 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WYfzkl888Wey; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 14:08:51 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BFAEABF7C; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 14:08:47 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1507036127; bh=ZjzUlp7hjVdQpHmdu2YMFZ/yN6K8DWwMXc5gh4/5fhk=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=4CE2e6CHd0/owe2seWseVe7H/06zT/fKsw3E1/BKZKlnzJ/FQd7RqqFS9hM89JtYb 7mVxOJ1KUjriUzbeerWJaa3/h83XtErHtFPU1+ftqu00IQmWCMT3EOI2sjMgCs+rw1 nWFeQjyrSlJgpKfucP/I6WPZocsuSJscKPSbyEfs=
To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Cc: lp-wan <lp-wan@ietf.org>
References: <CAC8QAcdANWAL4rz7_xVve8U6W80xGj8ibs6JfE6RpvBeOpBBLQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <23416f7b-c23e-b5a0-4917-061449b4ce18@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 14:08:47 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAcdANWAL4rz7_xVve8U6W80xGj8ibs6JfE6RpvBeOpBBLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="EsPOK2NCFRMxNrCGTFxnmV9g1rCHM83AM"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lp-wan/ixGQADEwAwv0Mn44xeR2P2JSAPA>
Subject: Re: [lp-wan] Review of draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-06.txt
X-BeenThere: lp-wan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Low-Power Wide Area Networking \(LP-WAN\), also known as LPWA or Low-Rate WAN \(LR-WAN\)" <lp-wan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lp-wan>, <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lp-wan/>
List-Post: <mailto:lp-wan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan>, <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 13:08:57 -0000

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
>>
>