Hi Pascal et al. Yes, this is indeed correct. I have just submitted a draft for IPv6 adaptation layer over DECT Ultra Low Energy. Comments much appreciated. Best Regards, Peter Mariager
From: Pascal Thubert (pthubert) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 6. april 2011 11:23 To: C Chauvenet; Carsten Bormann; Oliver Hahm Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: [6lowpan] WG adoption of draft-patil-6lowpan-v6over-btle-01.txt Agreed. Also, I've seen interest in IPv6 over DECT, with the advantage of an unlicensed band (mostly 1880 - 1900 MHz in Europe) that's dedicated to the technology. Pascal http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7011357/ > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of C Chauvenet > Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 10:45 AM > To: Carsten Bormann; Oliver Hahm > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [6lowpan] WG adoption of draft-patil-6lowpan-v6over-btle- > 01.txt > > Hi All, > > I definitely push the idea of a "generic IPv6 over low power foo" > specification > (if achievable). > IPv6 may be used over various low power media, and if a generic adaptation > layer can be designed, this may avoid to write a specification fo each low > power media (exiting and to appear) that use IPv6. > By the way, low power media cannot be restricted to wireless media. We > also have to consider wired media (like low power PLC currentlty specified in > IEEE P1901.2) as they shared many requirements with well known LoWPAN > technologies. > > Cédric. > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la > part de Carsten Bormann Envoyé : lundi 4 avril 2011 22:05 À : Oliver Hahm Cc : > [email protected] Objet : Re: [6lowpan] WG adoption of draft-patil-6lowpan- > v6over-btle-01.txt > > On Apr 1, 2011, at 19:40, Oliver Hahm wrote: > > > Therefore, a more generic specification for IPv6 over low-power wireless > foo would be really interesting for us - and probably a lot of other people as > CC1020 and CC110x are very popular transceivers for WSN. > > I think that is an interesting idea. How much of such a specification could > be > generic and how much would need to be specific to each of the radios? Can > you describe the decisions you had to take in applying 6LoWPAN to these > radios? > > And, even better, can you write a draft? > > Gruesse, Carsten > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
_______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
