# Interim #6 2022 Data / Time ----------- + Date: May 17th, 2022 + Time: [7-8am US Pacific PST, 4pm CET](https://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1&lid=100,12,5392171,1850147&h=100&date=2022-05-17&sln=14-15) Meeting Information ----------- + Agenda: [on datatracker](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/agenda-interim-2022-lpwan-06-lpwan-01/) + Meeting material: [on datatracker](https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/interim-2022-lpwan-06/session/lpwan) + Meeting link: [Meetecho Link](https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/interim/?short=e49aad97-7d37-4711-ba37-74ca619243b2) + Live Minutes: [CODIMD Link](https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-interim-2022-lpwan-06-lpwan#) # Interim Agenda ## [16:05] Administrivia [10min] * Note-Well, Scribes, Agenda Bashing * WG Status ## [16:15] Data Model Shepherding [25min] * Dominique's review * Pascal's review * Expressing timeouts as mantissa + exponent * impacts on ## [16:40] Compound Ack Shepherding [10min] * Alex's report ## [16:50] SCHC o SigFox Shepherding [5min] * Ana's report ## [16:55] AOB [ QS ] # ToDOs * Laurent to publish yang model 10 and Pascal to press the submit button * Sergio to publish a new SCHC over SigFox and chairs to start WGLC * Sergio to publish a new Compound Ack, Dominique to check that comments were addressed and Alexander to send for publication * Ana to publish a new SCHC over NB IoT and Pascal to refresh the pending WGLC to pull more comments # Minutes ## [16:05] Administrivia [10min] * Note-Well, Scribes, Agenda Bashing * WG Status Alexander presents the note well ## [16:15] Data Model Shepherding [25min] * Dominique's review DB: I'm happy with the changes following my review * Pascal's review PT: The only think we needed to handle is the way to handl the timer PT: Laurent have you seen my e-mail LT: Yes, We can go into the details if you wish LT: There is a partial implementation on OpenSCHC, we can write and we have the representation conforming the YANG data model PT: Did you handle the time issue? LT: Yes, I did, it is already on OpenSCHC PT: What about the problem with the 72 chars/line. There's a tool on IETF site LT: It just generates a warning, so I have to do it by hand PT: Very few refs on SCHC over Coap, only two LT: OK. DB: Sorry, I forgot to mention, after I checked the changes, I submitted 2 Pull Requests fixing one nit each in the yang file and the md file. Please have a look. LT: when? LT: Yesterday LT: I test this morning the IETF Flag and there is warning that will be fixed PT: will you publish a accepting the two changes, then i'll push the botttom * Expressing timeouts as mantissa + 2^exponent /10^6 LT: we discuss about it, there is a problem when having very big numbers and small numbers with an adequate resolution, we propose to define it as mantissa + 2^exponent /10^6 Hence, in the github repo there is a small python program that gives you this mumber, first we have exp, then small value and finally highest value. This is compliant with the specification we have now. We have a very flexible way to have small times and very long times that can be applied to a large spectrum of applications. DB:I just wanted to check that we are not re-inventing some time format that already exists in protocols likely to be implemented in contrained IoT devices, like CoAP. Doesn't CoAp have timers? How is time expressed? PT: Is very close (exept the exp) to what we do in RPL LT: I changed position in the TV for indicia Do you think that this is clear for implementers? DB: why not index? Sounds like a better term. LT: found in xxx dictionnary. DB: (in the chat) To me, "indicia" looks like a plural form in latin. Can we double-check this term? I'm really doubtful. * impacts on Architecture ## [16:40] Compound Ack Shepherding [10min] * Alex's report AP: I'll finish that by the next interim to press the buttom ## [16:50] SCHC o SigFox Shepherding [5min] * Ana's report PT: Before going to Ana's review: does the authors feel it is ready for last call? SA: I think that we're doing an update, reordering, changing the headers, RCS according to the last IETF meeting, we'll try to do it before next interim PT: so not ready before nest call? SA: yes we're not ready yet PT: Go Ana: AM: OK, I'll wait for the next version SA: some changes in the draft are being made NOT ready for WGLC, need AM: Some questions to be answered: - DW Trasnmissions: - DTag: if DTag = 0, then you're not using it SA: OK, i'll look at it AM: It might be good to explain how you're going to do interleaving packets. SA: Yes, I totally agree AM: I can send the comments now, or I can wait untind the next version SA: I prefer to have it now in order to add it in the document PT: It seems that we're having to double the number of rules, for me at least one bit for DTag will help to have interleaving LT: one bit is like generating 2 rules, is just a convinience, but is not mandatory. PT: Now, the code will need to look for two rules AM: The memory should be taken into account if you have two rules. SA: I'll take this comments to the authons, and we'll see how to handle it, maybe DTag of one bit will help. PT: Thats all for today, does anyone have something to say? DB: I recommend against using the term "indicia". This is something really different. I've put some references in the chat. DB: (in the chat) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indicia : Indicia is the plural of the Latin word indicium, meaning distinguishing marks, signs or identifying marks. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/indicia : From Latin indicia, plural of indicium (“a notice, information, discovery, sign, mark, token”) LT: We have index but I dont like it LT: For me index is not sequential DB: Why? In a vector, isn't each element selected by an index? LT: We can keep index for now, and then think if there is something better AM: I'd like to ask about NBIoT, I'll publish asap, it is ready. PT: Do we have a Shepard for this? AN: No, we did the las call after the IETF PT: I'll ask for more reviews, please publish. SA: We're also sending a new version of compound ack, we changed some stuff, once Dominique send us the comments I'll publish it. DB: I can feel the pressure now. AP: OK Sergio that's great. AP: LoRa Alliance adopted the SCHC technology based on the RFC 9011. The press release: https://lora-alliance.org/lorawan-news/lora-alliance-launches-ipv6-over-lorawan-opens-wide-range-of-new-markets-for-lorawan/ AP/DB: There is going to be a webinar too: https://lora-alliance.org/webinars-videos/ PT: TODO List: LT: New version YANG, SA: Push a New version, AM: New version NBIoT, SA: Few changes then review. ## [16:55] AOB [ QS ]