IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lwip] Discussion about IoT Device Classes

Christian Groves <cngroves.std@gmail.com> Wed, 01 February 2017 03:01 UTC

Return-Path: <cngroves.std@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lwip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lwip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD866126BF6 for <lwip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 19:01:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.332
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.332 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 a4bAfm8v_2R4 for <lwip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 19:01:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from msh04.myshophosting.com (msh04.myshophosting.com [101.0.86.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 154CC129856 for <lwip@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Jan 2017 19:01:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ppp118-209-34-95.lns20.mel4.internode.on.net ([118.209.34.95]:62650 helo=[192.168.1.22]) by msh04.myshophosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from <cngroves.std@gmail.com>) id 1cYlB8-0004wp-C8 for lwip@ietf.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2017 14:01:50 +1100
To: lwip@ietf.org
References: <2e19e2da-f86d-3889-690d-4d624a2c4489@gmx.net> <132DAB99-A623-47CD-9636-7DF67D75C188@tzi.org> <F3B7F8F0-F8B4-4B57-92F6-22701D85787B@tzi.org>
From: Christian Groves <cngroves.std@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2d9cf5f4-431c-a7ba-08a5-fd506b15912d@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 14:01:46 +1100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <F3B7F8F0-F8B4-4B57-92F6-22701D85787B@tzi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - msh04.myshophosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - gmail.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: msh04.myshophosting.com: authenticated_id: christian@kunstmade.com.au
X-Authenticated-Sender: msh04.myshophosting.com: christian@kunstmade.com.au
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/J4AosS-l5BQOHK19E-Yt-r0nutg>
Subject: Re: [Lwip] Discussion about IoT Device Classes
X-BeenThere: lwip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Lightweight IP stack <lwip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lwip>, <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lwip/>
List-Post: <mailto:lwip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip>, <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2017 03:01:56 -0000

I did a quick read of the draft and to me its not clear what the goal of 
clause 5.2 "Class of Internet Integration" is.

The table talks about internet technologies, the text makes reference to 
communications patterns (e.g. device-to-cloud) whereas the section is on 
integration. It also lists I9 which seems to suggest there will be 
"degrees" on classes of integration between I1 and I9.

So is the aim to only have 3 types? e.g.

Device Internal IP usage - IP Interoperability not an issue.

Device to Provider Server - IP Interoperability within a service provider.

Device to Any - IP interoperability required between multiple service 
providers.

Or to have something more specific to IP listing what parts of the IP 
suite are supported?

Regards, Christian



On 26/01/2017 6:57 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 26 Jan 2017, at 00:38, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:
>> Sure.  We started that discussion a few IETFs ago and have a bis draft out at
>> draft-bormann-lwig-7228bis.
> … and the editors’ draft is now at:
>
> https://github.com/lwig-wg/terminology
> and
> https://lwig-wg.github.io/terminology/
>
> Issues and pull requests are welcome.
> (Please see https://github.com/lwig-wg/terminology/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md ).
>
> (The proposed bis document is an individual submission at this point; we still put it up under the “lwig-wg” organization as there appears to be some interest.)
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lwip mailing list
> Lwip@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email