Re: [lp-wan] Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

["Eric Vyncke (evyncke)" <[e-mail]>]

Let's try to close this discussion before the end of the year holiday season 😊 and sorry to sound pushy 😉

Since the October IESG ballot on -12 [Diff], there have been multiple events and revisions:
- the 2016 [LS1480] was discussed during the IETF-115 3GPP-IETF coordination meeting, this is a request from 3GPP to the IETF to work on SCHC for 3GPP
- the IETF-115 3GPP-IETF coordination meeting discussed the draft, and it was minuted that the I-D does not seem to generate opposition by 3GPP and it will be discussed during the 3GPPP meeting of the following week [3GPP]
- probably based on the 2022 [LS1796] from LPWAN to 3GPP, one 3GPP participant, Ivo, has written a review [Ivo] on his behalf (i.e., not on 3GPP behalf) and the -15 addresses all the comments [Ivo2]

The [Diff] between the latest -15 and -12 include:

Abstract now ends with "This document has two parts.  One normative to specify the use of SCHC over NB-IoT.  And one informational, which recommends some values if 3GPP wanted to use SCHC inside their architectures."

In a similar way, section 1 (introduction) ends with "This document has two parts, a standard end-to-end scenario describing how any application must use SCHC over the 3GPP public service.  And informational scenarios about how 3GPP could use SCHC in their protocol stack network."

Section 5 clearly identifies a normative and an informative sub-sections. The section 5.2 even starts with "These scenarios show how 3GPP could use SCHC for their transmissions."

I.e., it really seems to me that the authors have made changes that clarify the normative and informative parts, i.e., the IETF does not go outside its boundaries.

So, Lars, if you have time before taking any day off, you may want to reconsider your previous ballot in the light of the above, or recommend further changes in the I-D,

Thanks a lot in advance,

Regards,

-éric

[Diff] https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot-12&url2=draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot-15&difftype=--html
[LS1480] 2016-06-01 https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1480/
[LS1796] 2022-09-27 https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1796/
[3GPP] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/3gpp-ietf-coord/EfmZNKL_14wRW61M3Uj_RoP0iY0/  + minutes: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/3gpp-ietf-coord/tjw1576HyNnh2GHQln6l7JTkYSU/
[Ivo] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/Z2PZRG1UJWOECXoE_dkskZ71dKM/
[Ivo2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/3gpp-ietf-coord/6cxwpRc8P3Z6DqXe33V1WHO1jWE/


From: iesg <[e-mail]> on behalf of Ana Minaburo <[e-mail]>
Date: Sunday, 6 November 2022 at 19:05
To: Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>, Spencer Dawkins <[e-mail]>, "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <[e-mail]>
Cc: The IESG <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>, Pascal Thubert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Lars Eggert's Discuss on draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot-12: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

Dear Lars, Spencer and Rob,

We have published version-13 today.  You will find the link below.


The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot/

There is also an htmlized version available at:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot-13

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-nbiot-13

Thanks you for your inputs.

Ana

On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 4:06 PM Lars Eggert <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
Hi,

thanks for the changes. I'll wait until -13 is submitted to review the diff.

On Nov 3, 2022, at 12:33, Ana Minaburo <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> ### "Abstract", paragraph 1
> ```
>      The 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP)
>      and the Narrowband Internet of Things (NB-IoT) architectures may
>      adopt SCHC to improve their capacities.
> ```
> Would 3GPP be surprised to see this recommendation by the IETF? Has this work
> item been liaised to and coordinated with 3GPP? Do they expect us to deliver it
> and do they agree on the content?
>
> [Ana] I have modify the content of the abstract to:
> This document describes Static Context Header Compression and Fragmentation (SCHC) specifications, RFC 8724 and RFC 8824, over the 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) and the Narrowband Internet of Things (NB-IoT) architectures and provides elements for efficient parametrization.
>
> This document has two parts. One normative to specify the use of SCHC over NB-IoT. And one informational, which recommends some values if 3GPP uses SCHC techniques.
>   ### Section 5.1, paragraph 1
> ```
>      This section consists of IETF suggestions to the 3GPP.
> ```
> The IETF isn't typically giving suggestions to other SDOs by publishing
> documents. We do that through liaison activities. Has this work item be liaised
> to 3GPP? Do they expect us to complete and publish the work so they can
> normatively refer to it?
>  [Ana] Yes, there is a liaison with 3GPP. I've modified the paragraph to:
> Deploying SCHC over the radio link only would require placing it as part of the protocol stack for data transfer between the Dev-UE and the RGW-eNB. This stack is the functional layer responsible for transporting data over the wireless connection and managing radio resources.

I understand 3GPP has been informed via a liaison of the existence of this work item - have they acknowledged this at all? Have they indicated that they are OK with the work?

Thanks,
Lars