Subject: [Coma] Management of Constrained Networks and Devices

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 16:00:16 +0100

Hi,

Could someone clarify something for me please? 

Coma is identified as being for the Management of Constrained Networks
and Devices, yet the discussion to date seems to have just focused on
constrained devices. So is the "and" a boolean, meaning neither
"Unconstrained Devices on Constrained Networks" nor "Constrained Devices
on Unconstrained Networks" are included? For example, manpack HF radios
may not be constrained devices but do exist on a constrained network and
may need to be remotely managed. Should they be included?

Thanks,

Jonathan

This email and any files attached are intended for the addressee and may contain information of a confidential nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that this email was sent to you in error and you should not disclose, distribute, print, copy or make other use of this email or its attachments. Such actions, in fact, may be unlawful. In compliance with the various Regulations and Acts, General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited reserves the right to monitor (and examine for viruses) all emails and email attachments, both inbound and outbound. Email communications and their attachments may not be secure or error- or virus-free and the company does not accept liability or responsibility for such matters or the consequences thereof. General Dynamics United Kingdom Limited, Registered Office: 21 Holborn Viaduct, London EC1A 2DY. Registered in England and Wales No: 1911653.

---

From: Zach Shelby <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 17:06:51 +0200

Jonathan,

Excellent point. It is Constrained Networks *or* Devices in practice really, as you point out there are cases when not so constrained devices are on challenging networks. Any 802.15.4 network for example falls under this category. 

So the discussion about Class 0, 1, 2 doesn't really explain the whole story. 

Zach

On Jun 7, 2012, at 5:00 PM, <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Coma is identified as being for the Management of Constrained Networks and Devices, yet the discussion to date seems to have just focused on constrained devices. So is the “and” a boolean, meaning neither “Unconstrained Devices on Constrained Networks” nor “Constrained Devices on Unconstrained Networks” are included? For example, manpack HF radios may not be constrained devices but do exist on a constrained network and may need to be remotely managed. Should they be included?

-- 
Zach Shelby, Chief Nerd, Sensinode Ltd.
http://www.sensinode.com
http://zachshelby.org  - My blog "On the Internet of Things"
http://6lowpan.net - My book "6LoWPAN: The Wireless Embedded Internet"
Mobile: +358 40 7796297

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 15:01:52 -0700

Hi -

> From: <[email-masked]>
> To: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 8:00 AM
> Subject: [Coma] Management of Constrained Networks and Devices
...
> may need to be remotely managed. Should they be included?

I read it as "management of constrained networks, and management of
constrained devices".

Having a birthday party for Bob and Carol doesn't preclude
Ted and Alice from getting some cake, too.

I think it is quite reasonable to raise the question of high-capability
devices only reachable through constrained networks, and that seems
clearly within the scope of management of constrained networks.

Randy