Re: [Lwip] The LWIG Challenge

[Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>]

Hi Cao,

On 07/04/2014 01:30 PM, Cao, Zhen (CZ) wrote:
> At least for example, using of send-only model for sleeping nodes to
> save energy. Need of eliminating the role or acting as a COAP server
> or Waiting for COAP observation subscriptions.

I think that this issue could be described independent of any radio
technology. At least right now there is nothing in there that makes it
radio technology specific.

I have just submitted an updated version of the IAB Smart Object
Architecture document and included a section on design patterns (see
Section 2 of
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-smart-object-architecture-04.txt).


I am convinced that we need to have stories about the standards we
believe should be used in each of these scenarios. Even for the simplest
scenario (device-to-cloud) we do not yet have a complete story.

If we could produce documents that specifically refer to these scenarios
and discuss a specific concern (such as security or energy efficiency)
that might get us somewhere. For DTLS-based security that's what I am
trying to do, as mentioned at the last IETF meeting. I am not yet there
since I am still getting the "paper-work" done in with the DTLS profile
document in the DICE working group. Note also that the DTLS profile
draft only focuses on the device-to-cloud use case - nothing else (and
that's already complex enough).

Ciao
Hannes