Re: [Lwip] Discussion about IoT Device Classes

Renzo Navas <renzoefra@gmail.com> Thu, 26 January 2017 09:33 UTC

Return-Path: <renzoefra@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 1EE2212950B for <lwip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 48sSUeVjrWBf for <lwip@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E35B9129509 for <lwip@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id w20so6902049qtb.1 for <lwip@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+t65rJTw8O6vJCmOIRqESKdsgDsFHI/RP3hIJgsUiVE=; b=EZo0HYLvBEwNTwK4NVvItmjNageRmtkB7Hgn9bEsdiXg8PD+e3gLnJG9OmbYDiO+aK cX6lDbWdmWZHRpVJWDHuJ0HWb2CWZg0zzPur/uoi4vFfePMVpirsxHUzDTWzW1hg1Hxw zcWUun/mWGwZfqixanaDintyZMeOGNOcclimKdWmg59ZqtSNOqhY7Bia+91ee+d7PNC8 Plx109DexbRkku+n2dLwHF/rM0dWmoYyPb7LtCtMO5WCf2azcnZQIMuHNNVnx0V+lfYV SfvPE4urZIAQ4QVr7Fot46z+xjzlGREuHfbTSF69/vKPuRhpr7mCjirWxM2YStRpWExo FuSg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+t65rJTw8O6vJCmOIRqESKdsgDsFHI/RP3hIJgsUiVE=; b=XRQMaUhdZR+y6agRqoSPDyVeQvVW84rP2bUn5e39yEZYnL/CBqmy762mpnaMmvDH7i XEYEUpCx0Ya5qHt+uGGJxHYUKp6JVs41PkPfJPhI2/kaRx8Z6t2HgqYcVJljyF5TOHv+ gz2otJaJ2tGHXgy1hrPBs9F26qJb4y3TAjXCgtv/9F46KvrN0A7zB4OJGG93JUhzki38 h2bMwv3pMch68idKGIlboqqtt65LCWQM4S177UI2fUf30K6bSXFKWNEF/93GEO6sl253 MZKT1AZ38/VOuj3ltSFZHUFtG913eO9rvEtq4U1okYNnoCrczrhCeHuF3cS2mXenMpSL /u+Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXL8vd+f21/vTZtjfLkzXCkDHxJs9vtbtV1yCofm6zw//WNOnEatbT2b9J2NKwt1Uy9PEfG7GFPZa54T9Q==
X-Received: by 10.55.214.207 with SMTP id p76mr1649614qkl.241.1485423208078; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:28 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.200.36.212 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:07 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <F3B7F8F0-F8B4-4B57-92F6-22701D85787B@tzi.org>
References: <2e19e2da-f86d-3889-690d-4d624a2c4489@gmx.net> <132DAB99-A623-47CD-9636-7DF67D75C188@tzi.org> <F3B7F8F0-F8B4-4B57-92F6-22701D85787B@tzi.org>
From: Renzo Navas <renzoefra@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:33:07 +0100
Message-ID: <CAD2CPUEMqqQwNoJKOoFuW4=GijT7Tq7FxWQ0eeTOzRqu-h-bpw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "lwip@ietf.org" <lwip@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/ScHHifzLJ6nholg8MLLmq9rOTb0>
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: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 09:33:30 -0000

Hello Hannes, Carsten, Zhen, and LWIG!

Thank you Carsten for starting the 7228bis initiative;

I am also interested on making explicit the "time awareness"
constraints for devices. As we discussed before (on ACE and Clock
design team): RealTimeChip or not; possibility of synchronized time or
not (absolute or relative), etc.
e.g: Raspberry Pi (Class 2), Arduino Mega (C1), do not have a RTC.

So the 7228bis might be a great place to put this in.

Regards,

Renzo