Subject: [6lowpan] 6lowpan-nd version 2

From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 16:30:24 -0700

Erik and I have updated draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-02.txt and
submitted for
publication. The new update includes a section on generic application of
this draft for non-multicast, non-broadcast network. At the last wg meeting,
the request was made for such an update  for the Wimax effort
on IPv6.

Two questions to the working group and the chairs:

  1) Should this draft( 6lowpan-ipv6-nd) be published as a WG document ?
  2) Are we OK with publishing the draft as "IPv6 Neighbor Discovery
Optimization
      for IEEE 802.15.4 and other non-multicast networks" so that it contains
      specifics on 6lowpan and a generic guideline for other relevant networks?

Comments are welcome.

- Samita

_______________________________________________
6lowpan mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan

---

From: Soohong Daniel Park <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 20:27:52 +0900

Hi Samita, 

Please see my comments inline.

> submitted for publication. The new update includes a section on generic 
> application of this draft for non-multicast, non-broadcast network. 
> At the last wg meeting, the request was made for such an update  for 
> the Wimax effort on IPv6.

Let me clarify one point, 

I remember the relevent discussion in Dallas. Yes, we definitely 
need this aspect, however 16ng WG (IP over IEEE 802.16)
has been newly created in INT area and they will take care of
this issue as one of WG deliverable. So, please toss it to that.
Here is a 16ng WG approval;
http://eeca16.sogang.ac.kr/pipermail/16ng/Week-of-Mon-20060619/000154.html

>  1) Should this draft( 6lowpan-ipv6-nd) be published as a WG document ?

I don't have a strong objection and the current document really looks good. 
However before that, we should trigger 6lowpan WG rechartering taking 
into account this issue and others concerned.

In my memory, there are five items.

- 6lowpan bootstrapping and IPv6 ND optimization
- Stateful header compression problem statements
- Recommendations for 6lowpan applications
- 6lowpan mesh routing
- 6lowpan security analysis

Geoff and Carsten, what is going on in rechartering ?

>      specifics on 6lowpan and a generic guideline for other relevant networks?

Above.

Regards.

Daniel (Soohong Daniel Park)
Mobile Convergence Laboratory, SAMSUNG Electronics.

---

From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:05:10 -0700

Hi Daniel,

Please see my comments in-line.

> this issue as one of WG deliverable. So, please toss it to that.

There is no conflict with 16ng ND with this work. As Erik and
Basavaraj mentioned
before that we need to make sure that 6lowpan-ND and 16ng ND modifications
do not provide different  solutions for the same problem. Because the solution
presented in 6lowpan-ND document can be generally applicable to any other
non-multicast/broadcast  energy-efficient network (16ng is one of the immediate
 applications), the  'general applicability' of this
draft may be useful for other type of power efficient networks as well.

Thus the idea is that 16ng-ND draft can update its text based on the information
in the general applicability section of the 6lowpan-ND draft.

> into account this issue and others concerned.

We have had extensive discussion on the usefulness of 6lowpan-ND
work at the January Interim meeting. My understanding from that meeting is
that IPv6 ND optimization is a no-brainer item in the new charter.

So, I agree that it'll be good to see the 6lowpan charter updated.

Thanks,
-Samita

---

From: Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 19:54:20 -0700 (PDT)

Hi Samita,

----- Original Message ----
From: Samita Chakrabarti <[email-masked]>
To: Soohong Daniel Park <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 9:05:10 PM
Subject: Re: [6lowpan] 6lowpan-nd version 2

Hi Daniel,

Thus the idea is that 16ng-ND draft can update its text based on the information
in the general applicability section of the 6lowpan-ND draft.
==>There is no 16ng-ND draft, there is presently a draft which in part has the relay DAD which seems to be adopted from your draft.
==>can you be more specific?
==>Thanks,
==>--behcet

Thanks,
-Samita

---

From: "Samita Chakrabarti" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 23:12:04 -0700

HI Behcet,

On 6/26/06, Behcet Sarikaya <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > > Erik and I have updated
> draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-02.txt and
> ==>There is no 16ng-ND draft, there is presently a draft which in part has
> the relay DAD which seems to be adopted from your draft.

Good point. There is no 16ng-ND draft. 16ng has a document,
draft-madanapalli-ipv6-over-802.16-ipv6cs-00  which talks about
IPv6 issues in 802.16 networks.  6lowpan-ND optimizations are
applicable to those situations as well, in general, but  they need to
apply the ideas into their own network components, such as ASN-GW
as opposed to 802.15.4 co-ordinators.

Thus at Dallas meeting it was agreed that either we split the
6lowpan-ND for generic and 6lowpan-specific solutions or update the
6lowpan-ND
draft with a separate section for generic behavior.  IPv6-ND-over-Foo
networks then can refer to this general section for applying into
their own situations.

Regards,
-Samita

---

From: Julien Laganier <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 16:28:30 +0200

Hi Samita and Daniel,

On Tuesday 27 June 2006 04:05, Samita Chakrabarti wrote:
> > > draft-chakrabarti-6lowpan-ipv6-nd-02.txt and submitted for
> > > publication. The new update includes a section on generic
> > > application of this draft for non-multicast, non-broadcast
> > > network. At the last wg meeting, the request was made for such
> > > an update  for the Wimax effort on IPv6.
> >
> before that we need to make sure that 6lowpan-ND and 16ng ND
> modifications do not provide different  solutions for the same
> problem. Because the solution presented in 6lowpan-ND document can
> be generally applicable to any other non-multicast/broadcast 
> energy-efficient network (16ng is one of the immediate
> Thus the idea is that 16ng-ND draft can update its text based on
> the information in the general applicability section of the
> 6lowpan-ND draft.

Until today I was unaware of existence of Relay-DAD in 6lowpan and 
16ng (silly me ;-)

As I mentionned already on the 16ng mailing list today:
<http://eeca16.sogang.ac.kr/pipermail/16ng/Week-of-Mon-20060626/000165.html>

In a draft I co-author (available there until it shows up in ID rep: 
(<http://julien.laganier.free.fr/draft-ietf-netlmm-mn-ar-if-01.txt) 
we also define Relay-DAD to support SEND (otherwise we could just have 
proxied ND.)

Hence, I thought I should also ask to this mailing list opinions on 
usefulness of a standalone document defining Relay-DAD?

Thanks,

--julien