Thanks Yatch,
We have teamed up with Simon/Joakim and begun working on the draft ... Expect
the first version in the first/second week of Jan.
If you want to see what in the making pls visit,
https://github.com/nyrahul/nbr_cache_mgmt ... note that the current work only
serves as ToC so
Hi Randy,
Rahul Jadhav and Rabi Narayan Sahoo, I guess.
https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/97/slides/slides-97-lwig-neighbor-management-policy-for-6lowpan-01.pdf
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll/current/msg10012.html
Best,
Yatch
On 2016/12/10 0:25, Randy Turner wrote:
Hi All,
Apologie
Hi All,
Apologies, but I forgot to write down the people that are working on a neighbor
management draft - can someone chime in again
with who is working on this ?
Randy
___
6tisch mailing list
6tisch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6ti
Hi Tengfei,
My first impression of your ideas is that it's a bit complicated,
especially the idea of generalizing Add, Delete, and Relocate
commands. I'd suggest discussing the Relocation command format alone
first.
I have another comment, which is more technical.
it will ends up something wit
+1
Qin
On Friday, December 9, 2016 6:23 AM, peter van der Stok
wrote:
+1 peter
I hope the bootstrap drafts can be combined.
Tengfei Chang schreef op 2016-12-09 11:45:
> +1. I support to adopt this draft. It's important to have this secure
> joining process in 6TiSCH network.
>
> Teng
Dear all,
As we are going to have RELOCATE command in sixtop draft, then we will need
add a specific format for RELOCATE. Though the format is not discussed yet,
but I think finally it will ends up something with two list of cell in the
packet and having (a) fields to indicate where the cell list
Hi Thomas,
> On 09 Dec 2016, at 15:28, Thomas Watteyne wrote:
>
> Glenn,
>
> Do you plan on participating at the call in 34min? I will add an action point
> to discuss about it.
Unfortunately, today I’m not able to participate in the call.
>
> My take is that 6P signaling traffic is nothin
Dale,
+1 on your answer.
Thomas
On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> Randy Turner writes:
> > Just re-confirming an assumption -- from a TSCH perspective, slot
> > scheduling assumes any single transmission "cannot" exceed a slot
> > boundary -- if transmissions require a c
Talk to you then!
Simon
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Thomas Watteyne
wrote:
> Simon, Yatch,
> We are planning to discuss these points during the 6TISCH call in 45min.
> Thomas
>
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Yasuyuki Tanaka
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I also have comments on draft-ietf
Cool
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Maria Rita PALATTELLA <
maria-rita.palatte...@uni.lu> wrote:
> Thomas, I will join the call.
> Sure, I can shortly summarize the current discussion.
> I also believe there is no real need to have slides.
> Maria Rita
> --
> *From:*
Thomas, I will join the call.
Sure, I can shortly summarize the current discussion.
I also believe there is no real need to have slides.
Maria Rita
From: Thomas Watteyne [thomas.watte...@inria.fr]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 3:17 PM
To: Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
Glenn,
Do you plan on participating at the call in 34min? I will add an action
point to discuss about it.
My take is that 6P signaling traffic is nothing different from regluar
traffic, and I don't believe we have any text anywhere that mandates a
particular cell/slotframe to be used for it. Why
Maria Rita,
Will you be on the call in 45min? Can you provide us with a quick update on
what was agreed upon? No slides needed I believe, unless you want to put
some together quickly and present from your computer.
Thomas
On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
pthub...@cisco
Simon, Yatch,
We are planning to discuss these points during the 6TISCH call in 45min.
Thomas
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:12 AM, Yasuyuki Tanaka <
yasuyuki9.tan...@toshiba.co.jp> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I also have comments on draft-ietf-6tisch-6top-protocol-03; some of
> them are covered by Simon. :-
+1 peter
I hope the bootstrap drafts can be combined.
Tengfei Chang schreef op 2016-12-09 11:45:
+1. I support to adopt this draft. It's important to have this secure
joining process in 6TiSCH network.
Tengfei
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Xavi Vilajosana Guillen
wrote:
Hi, I support th
+1 Peter
AbdurRashidSangi schreef op 2016-12-09 11:00:
Hi Chairs,
It is a detailed document discussing the security (bootstrap) aspect
when nodes are joining with ‘zero-touch’ and this document provide
important insights.
I support the adoption.
Regards,
Rashid Sangi,
Huawei, Beijing.
FROM
+1. I support to adopt this draft. It's important to have this secure
joining process in 6TiSCH network.
Tengfei
On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Xavi Vilajosana Guillen <
xvilajos...@uoc.edu> wrote:
> Hi, I support the adoption of this draft. The draft proposes a lightweight
> secure joining me
Hi Chairs,
It is a detailed document discussing the security (bootstrap) aspect when nodes
are joining with ‘zero-touch’ and this document provide important insights.
I support the adoption.
Regards,
Rashid Sangi,
Huawei, Beijing.
From: 6tisch [mailto:6tisch-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Qin
HI Michael
Just to add, 6tisch has decided to use OSCOAP as the transport but other
external standards like Fairhair and Thread have already decided to use
DTLS as the transport for EST since it is already there and does not break
the workflow the way it might in 6tisch. So these draft on DTLS tr
Dear all :
For admin reasons I had to change the webex link. Please find the new
information below:
JOIN WEBEX MEETING
https://cisco.webex.com/ciscosales/j.php?MTID=mcdbbe3a4e38d97d986b507ec12a1f9b1
Meeting number (access code): 203 224 694 Meeting password: sixtus (749887 from
phones)
20 matches
Mail list logo
