Subject: Re:[RSN] RL2N Comments - Question about Finland Deployment.

From: 김진형 <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:38:34 +0900 (KST)

Hi all, 

I subscribed RL2N mailing list just now. 

I read the following post from the arciives. 

I have a question about "Finland Deployment"

Zach Shelby said "For example here in Finland 

we are already rolling out fairly large 6lowpan 

(over 1000 node) networks in the industrial 

and building automation domains."

To deploy 6lowpan node over 1000, I think there 

should be scalability issue. In current 6lowpan architecture

having adaptation layer, the adaption layer should perform

mesh routing. How can you solve this problem?

And, I want to know the industrial and 

building automation domains expample in detail.

Is it deployed in commercial site? or test-bed?

Can I get the more information about Filand Deployment?

Where or How?

Thanks in advance. 

Jin Hyoung Kim | Engineer | 

Samsung Electronics. 

======================================================

-Hi all,

-In my opinion the proposed RL2N charter is already pretty -good, here is some support from our experience.

First I would like to stress the same as JP and Phil. There is a huge need for standardized IP WSN routing in well-scoped domains *now*, *today*, to solve *real problems*. For example here in Finland we are already rolling out fairly large 6lowpan (over 1000 node) networks in the industrial and building automation domains. Our direct 6lowpan node volume, will be well over 25k nodes in 2008. SP100 helps next year, but for many applications a simpler 6lowpan + rl2n routing solution would be more suitable.

Almost all customers love the IP + 802.15.4 concept. But the biggest concern they still have is a lack of a standard routing technique.

I think the charter text is good, and scoping to these 3 areas really keeps it focused. One comment:

- The relationship with 6lowpan and SP100 could be explicit in the charter text (not just work-items)?

Have fun in Boston!

- Zach

--  Zach Shelby | CTO | +358 40 7796297  Sensinode Ltd.   www.sensinode.com

---------------------------------
 
올 한해 고마웠던 사람들에게 메시지 보내고 선물받으세요!
모두가 행복한 세상이 됩니다. UCC 참여하기
_______________________________________________
RSN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsn

---

From: JP Vasseur <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:30:37 -0500

Dear Jin,

Few comments in line,

From: 김진형 <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 13:38:34 +0900 (KST)
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re:[RSN] RL2N Comments - Question about Finland Deployment.

Hi all, 

To deploy 6lowpan node over 1000, I think there
should be scalability issue. In current 6lowpan architecture
having adaptation layer, the adaption
 layer should perform
mesh routing. How can you solve this problem?
 
JP> Routing in large scale networks in constrained environments in for sure
a challenging technical problem, and the reason why we’ll be having a BOF in
Vancouver in order to have a WG working on those issues.

JP> There are many deployments in several areas and the various requirements
IDs are inspired by concrete deployments based (today) on non-IP systems. So
the issue is solvable for sure, we now need to work on an IP-based solution.
Do not be surprised if you do not receive detailed deployments designs ...
Such design are usually the property of the customer and cannot (most of
time) be disclosed. This is not specific to L2Ns of course. This is why the
requirements ID provides concrete use cases from where the requirements are
derived.

You are very welcome to contribute to the work.

Thanks.

JP.  
 
Thanks in advance. 

-In my opinion the proposed RL2N charter is already pretty -good, here is
some support from our experience.

First I would like to stress the same as JP and Phil. There is a huge need
for standardized IP WSN routing in well-scoped domains *now*, *today*, to
solve *real problems*. For example here in Finland we are already rolling
out fairly large 6lowpan (over 1000 node) networks in the industrial and
building automation domains. Our direct 6lowpan node volume, will be well
over 25k nodes in 2008. SP100 helps next year, but for many applications a
simpler 6lowpan + rl2n routing solution would be more suitable.

Almost all customers love the IP + 802.15.4 concept. But the biggest concern
they still have is a lack of a standard routing technique.

I think the charter text is good, and scoping to these 3 areas really keeps
it focused. One comment:

- The relationship with 6lowpan and SP100 could be explicit in the charter
text (not just work-items)?

Have fun in Boston!

- Zach

 

올 한해 고마웠던 사람들에게 메시지 보내고 선물받으세요!
모두가 행복한 세상이 됩니다. UCC 참여하기
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_kr/taglines/2007_7thankyou/*http://kr.fun.kids.
yahoo.com/funnybox/thankyou.html>

---

From: Zach Shelby <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 22:55:25 +0200

Hi Jin,

Glad to see you're interested, and welcome to rl2n.

My comments in-line.

> Vancouver in order to have a WG working on those issues.

Correct, networks of this size create interesting scalability problems.
In e.g. our
industrial case there is a problem of handling even up to 150 RFD nodes
per FFD
coordinator. This is a MAC and implementation problem mainly. Aggregation
occurs at the coordinator, so the bulk of RFD devices do not participate
in routing.
We then use Sensinode's own implementation of 6lowpan mesh under to connect
coordinators to gateways over 1-3 hops, also employing ICMP nd to find
the gateways.
This is still small enough to handle with mesh-under. However one main
challenge
for rl2n is to scale routing with these networks, e.g. if all those
devices would be FFDs
and participate in routing.

> requirements ID provides concrete use cases from where the requirements are

Details are not yet available publicly. Soon there will however be a
press release
on the industrial roll-out, which is for monitoring a process in a
metallurgy plant
here in Finland initially. The building roll-out I hope I can share more
on early next year.

> Jin Hyoung Kim | Engineer |

Cheers,
Zach

-- 
Zach Shelby | CTO | +358 40 7796297
Sensinode Ltd.   www.sensinode.com