Subject: [Iot-onboarding] Some thoughts about iot-onboarding

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 14:46:05 +0100

I like idea of survey of onboarding method as an RFC. Individual or
even as WG document. Its an informative first milestone good to work
out.

One simple way to scope the amount of work for the survey output is 
to determine what specific apects we want to describe. The table from
eliot is very comprehensive and would be a lot of work to complete
in a document format.

The aspects i think we want to describe are i think what we would like
to use as input to 2nd milestones. For example the drafts brought
forward in ANIMA could be 2nd round milestones, they need to achieve
certain goals, and we do for example want to know that all their
proposed work is well spent, e.g.: there are no pre-existing onboarding
protocols that cold be used to do what they want to do. Aka: milestone 1
survey could justification reference for the milestone 2 docs.

Just one thought of how to approach. I am also happy to step back from
the survey side as an actual milestone deliverable, but concentrate
on progressing the likely most simple WiFi onboarding we think we need,
and keep work on survey as lightweight as possible (github only).

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 15:58:26 +0100

Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]> wrote:
    > One simple way to scope the amount of work for the survey output is to
    > determine what specific apects we want to describe. The table from
    > eliot is very comprehensive and would be a lot of work to complete in a
    > document format.

    > protocols that cold be used to do what they want to do. Aka: milestone
    > 1 survey could justification reference for the milestone 2 docs.

    > the survey side as an actual milestone deliverable, but concentrate on
    > progressing the likely most simple WiFi onboarding we think we need,

I don't think that the survey has value in itself.

The purpose is to be able to discern some critical categories/pivot points
that we can use to inform ourselves as to which things belong in which WGs
(or even within or without the IETF).

And, so that people will not re-invent new wheels.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
]     [email-masked]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [