IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Suit] Fwd: Firmware Update Paper

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 04 December 2019 19:00 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03EB4120A1F; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 11:00:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 4vgyANEGlBGY; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 11:00:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCABE1209EA; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 11:00:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E23E3818F; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 13:57:13 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF51DAAB; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:00:50 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Szymon_S=C5=82upik?= <simon@silvair.com>, Emmanuel Baccelli <Emmanuel.Baccelli@inria.fr>, suit@ietf.org, 6tisch@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <CABNHR1wOXx6QRYMMFgnNs12qtc5Ofs8MdR-Oe=d4KRCzXtaiQA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <VI1PR08MB53600B1D1A194F49B67B90DFFAC60@VI1PR08MB5360.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <20191127203651.GA117656@davidb.org> <CANK0pbaWkn7w2swRgkOqsTubE1os=rDo2BLjrTZ5eW6ePv3WnA@mail.gmail.com> <20191129183627.GA16289@davidb.org> <DB6PR0801MB1879D9742622EA0AE08A8B72EA430@DB6PR0801MB1879.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> <CABNHR1yEFvgEzHjBhpqTW-FX+LQTVYuSJE_9SP9OMwzjWsdORQ@mail.gmail.com> <CANK0pbaf8TTtMOSKHD0D-73+MCzSdjk7p+6hVO0WzpSxhF2fVg@mail.gmail.com> <CABNHR1z4N=uH9d5DvyYi17DCULqu3T6Ve9k-_EJr-37zUjF-uw@mail.gmail.com> <CANK0pbYGbzu8VAr7ZuzUOY1yQ75qkMKQ6PAncZCfkH2=RZWNUQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABNHR1wOXx6QRYMMFgnNs12qtc5Ofs8MdR-Oe=d4KRCzXtaiQA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 14:00:50 -0500
Message-ID: <5379.1575486050@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/suit/1remMViWUgcI8LO8EbiWuIikP1A>
Subject: Re: [Suit] Fwd: Firmware Update Paper
X-BeenThere: suit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Software Updates for Internet of Things <suit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/suit/>
List-Post: <mailto:suit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 19:00:57 -0000

Szymon Słupik <simon@silvair.com> wrote:
    > [SS] yeah... that 35kB is a bit unrealistic... for production stacks
    > (including application functionality) we see the FW sizes (uncompressed) to
    > be in 200kB range. But I take it the times scale linearly, so for 200kB the
    > transfer time would be about 1 minute. Have you considered the link
    > saturation during the transfer? In many cases you do not want the transfer to
    > [significantly] affect the operation of the network, so a strategy to reduce
    > the transfer duty cycle may be prudent.

I also agree with your question, and with the need to do the updates at a
lower priority.  6tisch has a whole bunch of mechanism here.

It occurs to me now that the development of an update protocol over 802.15.4
(which I mentioned in another email in this thread) might be appropriately
done in the 6tisch WG, since I actually think that the bandwidth and
scheduling of the update is probably the critical part.
SUIT has the security done... so we have the HOW.  We just have the WHEN.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email