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

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

(Chopping out the "done" bits...)

On 03/10/17 16:07, Behcet Sarikaya wrote:
>>> p.14
>>> EPC not defined
>>
> Evolved Packet Core (EPC)

Ack. Ta.

> 
> 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.
>>
> Maybe state that Wireless Smart Ubiquitous Network (Wi-SUN) is based on
> the IEEE 802.15.4g standard, therefore it is mesh network while Low Power
> Wide Area Network (LoRaWAN), SIGFOX support star architecture and are built
> on proprietary technologies.

I suspect that the proponents of those might not like
the term proprietary and the point about mesh and star
networks is already made I think.

> 
>>
>>> 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.
>>
> maybe add some text like above including mobility.

Again, if you'd like to offer text, we could look at
that but I think that point is pretty clear really to
anyone who'd read this document.

> 
> 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.
>>
>> I meant change this:
> 
> Packet Data Node Gateway (P-GW)
> 
> to
> packet data network gateway

Ah, gotcha. Sure, if that's better.


>>> 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.
>>
>>
> Add to the second paragraph
> NEMO [RFC3963 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3963>] Mobility solutions
> or a gateway with LTE uplink
> may be used ...

Fair enough. Added text along those lines.

Version -07 will pop out shortly with these and the
changes from Alper.

Thanks,
S.