Re: [smartpower-interest] Smart Grid Architecture Committee meeting 17 February

Paul Duffy <paduffy@cisco.com> Tue, 23 February 2010 04:05 UTC

Return-Path: <paduffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: smartpower-interest@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: smartpower-interest@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B9F928C146 for <smartpower-interest@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:05:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=x tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eM98ibfiR2bH for <smartpower-interest@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:04:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com (rtp-iport-2.cisco.com [64.102.122.149]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A26F28C1DB for <smartpower-interest@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:04:44 -0800 (PST)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-2.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-Files: ansic1222-wg1SecondBallot.doc : 1633280
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.49,523,1262563200"; d="doc'32?scan'32,208,32"; a="88108486"
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com ([64.102.124.12]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 23 Feb 2010 04:06:43 +0000
Received: from [10.86.248.78] (bxb-vpn3-78.cisco.com [10.86.248.78]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o1N46fhV023130; Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:06:41 GMT
Message-ID: <4B835451.8010805@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 23:06:41 -0500
From: Paul Duffy <paduffy@cisco.com>
Organization: Cisco Systems
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100111 Thunderbird/3.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Phil Roberts <roberts@isoc.org>
References: <55FA0F33-F37F-4429-92D0-9E99162BA496@cisco.com> <4B7C3C0C.6010002@isoc.org>
In-Reply-To: <4B7C3C0C.6010002@isoc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------070602040002020404040106"
Cc: smartpower-interest@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [smartpower-interest] Smart Grid Architecture Committee meeting 17 February
X-BeenThere: smartpower-interest@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: paduffy@cisco.com
List-Id: Smart Power Interest <smartpower-interest.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smartpower-interest>, <mailto:smartpower-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/smartpower-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:smartpower-interest@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:smartpower-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smartpower-interest>, <mailto:smartpower-interest-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:05:00 -0000

The ANSI metering specifications.  Find ANSI C12.19 (IEEE 1377) here ...

http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=661544&userType=inst

... and a pre-release draft of ANSI C12.22 attached (free!).

.19 is the data model transported around via .22

If you have time to examine, please share your thoughts.

Cheers


On 2/17/2010 1:57 PM, Phil Roberts wrote:
> A few meta-questions:
>
> - When you say it is proposed does that mean there is a possibility
> still to influence it at this point, and how does one go about doing
> that?
> - Once this document is done, how will it be used and by whom?
> - I'm not sure what to make of the ANSI C12.22 stuff, but I notice
> that it's $166 to get a copy of the standard, and there is some text
> recommending IETF and ANSI get together to create some common ground,
> specifically: "In both cases, it requires the ANSI standards and the
> IETF to come together and create this common ground."
>
>
>

....


>>> The architecture focuses, surprisingly, not on the use of TCP/UDP and
>> IP (v4 or v6), but on the place of the ANSI C12 series management
>> applications. Given that those are in the most recent filing moved
>> from "mandatory" to "should be considered", that is interesting. One
>> thing that would help, perhaps, is a description of how NetConf could
>> be used instead, and an openly-defined XML-based schema (from OASYS
>> perhaps?) that could be exchanged using it. I'm not going to write
>> that, but would entertain submissions.
>>
>>
>> http://www.ipinc.net/IPv4.GIF
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> smartpower-interest mailing list
>> smartpower-interest@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smartpower-interest
> _______________________________________________
> smartpower-interest mailing list
> smartpower-interest@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smartpower-interest
>