Wednesday November 7, 2018 LWIG Session at IETF103 Room: Meeting 2 Time: 11:20 - 12:20 Chairs: Mohit Sethi, Zhen Cao (absent) Note takers: Lijo Thomas, Ari Keränen Co-chair updates the working group status since IETF102 Suresh, AD : lwig cellular-6 , normative reference and informational reference to be updated , moving to next level Co-chair : Needs to push at the earliest , and let the authors decide the progress Ari: as co-author, can keep it wait for more time, make sense because RD last call is soon started, if it goes longer, wait and check the status and update the references if needed. Peter : not anymore pessimistic about RD, interop coming so that interoperability issues can be addressed Co-chair : presented the agenda for todays meeting # Lwig-tcp-constrained node-netowrks -04 (Carles) Ilpo Järvinen: will read the draft and come up with more comments Markku : will review the draft, single MSS issue if delayd ACKs off. When the data packet arrives, immediately ack , needs to be more clear, unnecessary ACK needs to fixed. With request / response traffic you immediately ack and send response. With delayed ACK would piggyback. Not clear if it is advisable to turn it off. Removed OpenWSN since mostly based on MicroTCP. Rahul : RIOT option. Hard to convince my people that lwIP can fit to 40kB. Is it possible to push the references to open source with lwig github Carles : Need to check the sources and get back Rahul: people are using this now for comparison. Need to have good sources. Not sure if LWIG github is the right place. Mohit: for the crypto comparison draft got lots of questions on how are these compiled to code. configuration for open source so that more people can use and check , a personal github, or lwig github Carles: some data corresponds to data from different platforms. Difficult to have fair comparison. Can try to make sure that references and sources are reflecting what is intended. The code sizes are not measured by us. From academic papers, from RIOT developers, etc. Have problem with heterogeneity. Mohit : as per the reference , lwip 2.0 all protocol stack on embed, how you verify the 40 KB , is it more reliable source ? Carles: we didn't do measurements but based on information from other references. Carles : WGLC ? MOhit : markku, ilpo and rahul comments to be addressed and wait for next revision to go for WG LC # Neighbor management policy (Rahul Jadhav) Rahul : Neighbor management policy presentation, how do u manage a neighbor cache in a 6lowpan, reservation and signaling recommendation for neighbor cache is addressed in the draft, and establish a stable network, Mohit: dont u have the neighbor cache entry with signal entry received, a specific signal modeling with your application, Rahul : have a application in place, it may be difficult to do the signal based network cache, Mohit : not sure about 6lowpan problem, but make it clear specify with your application and need not be generic # Fragment forwarding vs per Hop reassembly presentation (Rahul Jadhav) Carsten: random delay is application delay? Rahul: in addition to application delay added a random delay Carsten: what causes the numbers for MAC transmit failures? Rahul: lots of failures with fragment forwarding; we need to check what causes the failure in more granular level Carsten: interesting result, requires some diagnostic work to find out where it is there Mohit: hope to see a presentation on that next time # Security classes for Software updates for IoT (Pascal Urien) 18 different classes identified based on set of available security functionality (available bootloader, OTP, tamper-resistant keys, etc.). Sometimes easy to re-flash bootloader. That will result in less strong security than one-time programmable memory. If there's no permanent memory on device, that can be re-flashed in supply chain process, resulting in attacks. No way today to securely compute keys by software only. Need tamper resistant keys. (ran out of time; no time for Q&A) # Alternative Elliptic Curve Representations (Rene Struik) Rene presented current status (slide #4). Draft is actually very simple, most of it is tutorial style to the topic. Looking forward to more feedback. Also implementation experiences. For reviews look at mostly the non-appendix parts of the draft. Mohit: need to close meeting, looking for group to provide feedback. Carsten: thank you Rene (for doing this)! Mohit: need a few more reviews to progress the document. (meeting adjourned)