Re: [Last-Call] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-18

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Sergio,

The new version has addressed my comments. 

Thanks and regards,
Bo

-----Original Message-----
From: Sergio Aguilar Romero [mailto:sergio.aguilar.romero@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 1:00 PM
To: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ops-dir@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx; lp-wan@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-18

Hello Bo,

Happy new year.

We have published a new version of the draft.

Please find our comments below.

Best regards,

Authors of the SCHC over Sigfox draft

> On Dec 27, 2022, at 6:11 AM, Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Hi Sergio,
> 
> Happy holiday.
> 
> Thanks for addressing my comments. Please see inline for the reply. I have skipped the part we agreed.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bo
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergio Aguilar Romero [mailto:sergio.aguilar.romero@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2022 4:47 PM
> To: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: ops-dir@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox.all@xxxxxxxx; 
> last-call@xxxxxxxx; lp-wan@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of 
> draft-ietf-lpwan-schc-over-sigfox-18
> 
> 
>> 3. Section 3:
>> About "Provisioning protocol", can you give an example? Is this 
>> suggesting Netconf protocol?
>> 
> 
> How the Rules are provision is out of the scope of this document and is part of current work in the LPWAN WG in the LPWAN Architecture draft, which mentions:
> "the use of several protocols for rule management, such as NETCONF[RFC6241], RESTCONF[RFC8040], and CORECONF[I-D.ietf-core-comi]"
> [Bo Wu] I agree that the detailed description is out of the scope. I just feel that the provisioning protocol is a little vague, and maybe an example can be added.

We added an example with information of the provisioning protocol.


> 
>> 4. Section 3.1
>> The terms used in the architecture figure 1 and the document are 
>> little confusing.
>> 
>> In the figure 1, only sigfox device and Sigfox BS is marked, are the 
>> other network entities not part of sigfox network? Maybe the scope of 
>> the sigfox network can be provided. It is suggested to be consistent 
>> that Network Gateway
>> (NGW) is called the Sigfox cloud-based Network or cloud-based Sigfox 
>> Core Network?
>> 
> 
> We changed as part of the review process from Sigfox Network to Network Gateway (NGW).
> We have added below the NGW a label of Sigfox Cloud. Let us know if you think it provides the scope of the Sigfox network.
> [Bo Wu] In the figure 1, = : Internal Sigfox Network. Does this indicates "Network SCHC C/D + F/R" is also in the scope of Sigfox network?
> 
> 

We have modified figure 1 to indicate that the Network SCHC C/D + F/R is part of the external IP-based network.





-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux