Description: 

Sensor Networks have very specific routing requirements (discussed in
draft-culler-rsn-routing-reqs). A plethora of proprietary routing
protocols have been developed by various companies or ad-hoc SDOs
during the past few years. Considering that Sensor Networks do require
an end to end IP solution to extend the Internet to the Internet of
Things, an IP-based routing solution for such networks is highly
required. The aim of this BOF is to discuss the need to form a new WG
devoted to the routing issues for Sensor Networks since this work is
currently not done at the IETF. Specific protocol proposals are out of
scope for BOF discussion.

BOF organization: 

~ 120 people have registered to the rsn@ietf.org mailing list; we
expect about 100 attendees with a good mix of vendors (Archroc,
Sensinode, Samsumg, Intel (to be confirmed), Microsoft), Service
Providers (To be confirmed: FT, TI, NTT, ...), end users (USN:
Ubiquitous Sensor Networks in Korea).

BOF Chairs:
JP Vasseur - jpv@cisco.com
David Culler - dculler@archrock.com 

 
Routing Area Directors:
Ross Callon - rcallon@juniper.net
David Ward - dward@cisco.com 

 
Mailing Lists:
rsn@ietf.org (active)

Related IDs:
draft-culler-rsn-routing-reqs

Tentative BOF Agenda

1. Administrativia (Chairs, 5 min)
   - Notes takers
   - Agenda bashing

2. Scoping the BOF (Chairs/ADs, 20 min)
   - Motivation and problem statement presentation
   - Interaction with other WG (6lowpan)
   - What's in scope?
   - What's out of scope?

3. Routing requirements for Sensor Networks (several & chairs, 40mn)
   - Summary of the discussions on rsn@ietf.org
   - draft-culler-rsn-routing-reqs (David)
   - Discussion on the Routing Framework
   - Security
   - Manageability

4. RSN WG Charter (40 mn)

5. Conclusion and next steps (15mn, chairs and ADs).

Reading List
draft-culler-rsn-routing-reqs

Why do we need a separate WG ?

There is currently no other Working Group working on routing protocols
for Sensor Networks. A new WG may decide to select an existing routing
protocol in which case it will interact with the relevant WG or it may
specify a new routing protocol for Sensor Nets; at the time being the
only WG looking at Sensor Nodes is 6lowpan: discussions took place
with the 6lowpan chair (Geoff Mulligan) who agreed that the routing
issues should be discussed elsewhere. Note that the MANET protocols
have not been designed for Sensor Networks: at a first sight, they may
appear as good candidates but careful analysis must be performed to
show why they do not meet the set of requirements.

Pontential WG charter/Milestones: will be provided before end of June 15, 2007.

Logistics

a. Working Group or BOF full name with acronym in brackets:

RSN: Routing for Sensor Networks

b. AREA under which Working Group or BOF appears:

Routing Area

c. CONFLICTS you wish to avoid, please be as specific as possible:

First priority: 6lowpan, MANET
Second priority: IS-IS, OSPF, IDR.

d. Expected Attendance (figures from the previous IETF meeting are included in
the message that is sent when scheduling opens):

100

e. Special requests:

None

f. Number of sessions:

1

g. Length of sessions:
            - 1 hour 
            - 2 hours 
            - 2 1/2 hours 

2 hours.