[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-dd] Groups - New Action Item #0135 contact Low6PAN to askwhen they...
There was a failure with the attachment. Now i attached the mail as text. Regards, Elmar Elmar Zeeb schrieb: > Hi everybody- > please find attached the mail conversation between my colleague Guido > Moritz and the ROLL working group which investigates on routing in > 6LoWPAN networks. According to the mail, routing on layer 3 is a charter > item of the ROLL. Unless the underlying layer 2 supports routing itself > it is done in layer 3. To support 6LoWPAN in general routing on layer 3 > should be assumed. > > Regards, > Elmar > > Devon.Kemp@cda.canon.com schrieb: >> OASIS Web Services Discovery and Web Services Devices Profile (WS-DD) TC member, >> >> Mr. Devon Kemp has created a new action item. >> >> Number: #0135 >> Description: contact Low6PAN to ask when they... >> Owner: Elmar Zeeb >> Due: 15 Sep 2009 >> >> Comments: >> Mr. Devon Kemp 2009-08-27 20:45 GMT >> From the July 16th Meeting Minutes: >> WSDD-13: Link local scope address for discovery messages is not applicable in multi hop networks. Elmar led a discussion of DPWS in sensor networks. Site local vs. link local vs. variable scope. (a) Integration of Efficient XML with DPWS. (b) Antoine? mentioned that we need to support multiple bindings. Suggested to address (a) and (b) in a White Paper or file new issues. Resolved to leave #13 open awaiting Elmars AI. >> AI (Elmar) To contact Low6PAN to ask when they will have a decision on routing and how it will impact DPWS. >> >> >> View Details: >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-dd/members/action_item.php?action_item_id=2816 >> >> >> >> PLEASE NOTE: If the above links do not work for you, your email application >> may be breaking the link into two pieces. You may be able to copy and paste >> the entire link address into the address field of your web browser. >> >> - OASIS Open Administration > > -- ******************************************************************************* Dipl.-Inf. Elmar Zeeb Universität Rostock, Fakultät f. Informatik und Elektrotechnik Institut f. Angewandte Mikroelektronik und Datentechnik University of Rostock, Faculty of CS and EE Institute of Applied Microelectronics and Computer Engineering, 18051 Rostock Deutschland/Germany Tel. : ++49 (0)381 498 - 7262 Fax : ++49 (0)381 498 - 7252 Email: elmar.zeeb@uni-rostock.de www : http://www.imd.uni-rostock.de/, http://www.ws4d.org/ *******************************************************************************
Von: Tim Winter [wintert@acm.org] Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. September 2009 16:00 An: Guido Moritz Betreff: Re: WG: [Roll] RPL Next Steps Hi Guido, It is a charter item of the ROLL working group that the routing solution should operate at layer 3- you may be interested to have a look at the charter here: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll/charters In this sense, the `route over' approach is a fixed core principal. ROLL/RPL thus does not presume the presence/absence of any underlying mechanisms such as `L2 mesh'. An architectural principle we have been following is that, from the point of vew of routing at least, it should not matter what L2 technology is being employed, i.e. that RPL should be L2 agnostic. The ROLL solution is also chartered to give consideration to IPv6 multicast; although this has not yet been thoroughly handled in the current proposal it should be addressed soon. I would expect to see some flexible multicast support due to the fact that it is required by the defined ROLL application scenarios (http://tools.ietf.org/wg/roll) You may also be interested in an effort that has recently started to look at recommendations for application protocols running over constrained nodes/networks: 6lowapp https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-6lowpan-6lowapp-problem-01 I do hope that this is useful in your considerations for DPWS / WS-Discovery 1.2, please let me know if I can provide any additional clarifications/assistance. Regards, -Tim Guido Moritz wrote: > Dear Mr. Winter, > > some time ago I wrote you the mail to be found below. Unfortunately I > received now answer up to now. Did you receive my last mail? > > Regards, > Guido Moritz > >> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >> Von: Guido Moritz [mailto:guido.moritz@uni-rostock.de] >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. August 2009 13:26 >> An: 'Tim Winter' >> Betreff: AW: [Roll] RPL Next Steps >> >> Dear Mr. Winter, >> >> I found this mail in the ROLL mailing list. My University (of Rostock) is >> member in the OASIS WS-DD Technical Committee (see http://www.oasis- >> open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=ws-dd), which is standardizing > DPWS, >> SOAP-over-UDP and WS-Discovery. >> Our research group (see http://www.ws4d.org) already has spent high > efforts in >> the Devices Profile for Web Services (DPWS) and related issues. One of our >> current main topics is the deployment of DPWS in wireless sensor networks > and >> thus on top of 6LoWPAN. To push the upcoming WS-Discovery 1.2 standard > into >> the right direction, we trying to investigate coming routing strategies of > the >> ROLL WG. WS-Discovery for finding devices in a network makes use of IP >> multicast. IP multicast differs between link-local, site-local,... scopes. > To >> define an optimal scope for WS-Discovery multicast groups, we are highly >> interested in the routing strategies planed by ROLL. Is the statement > below >> (routing is performed over IP) a proposal or is this a fixed core decision > of >> the ROLL? The WS-DD TC requires a clear definition for further work around >> this. >> >> Thank you for your time in advance, >> >> Regards, >> Guido Moritz >> >> ------------------------- >> Dipl. Ing. Guido Moritz >> Universitaet Rostock, Fakultaet f. Informatik und Elektrotechnik >> Institut f. Angewandte Mikroelektronik und Datentechnik >> University of Rostock, Department of CS and EE >> Institute of Applied Microelectronics and Computer Engineering >> Richard-Wagner Str. 31, 18119 Rostock-Warnemuende >> Phone: +49 (0)381 498 - 7269 >> http://www.imd.uni-rostock.de >> http://www.aal-rostock.de >> >> [...] >>> >>> -is it the 6LoWPAN route over or mesh-under? >>> DT: RPL intends to operate purely at L3, and it is the intention of RPL > to >>> be L2 agnostic, so it "routes over". If it were over, e.g. switched >>> ethernet or 802.11 mesh or 802.15.4 mesh underneath, it should work. It >>> should also work on, e.g., ethernet, 802.11, and 802.15.4 where no >>> "meshing" is done at layer 2. >>> >> [...] > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]