Mobile Experts has released a new report titled Smart Utility Meters 2016. Constructed with the customary arsenal of sharp facts and stats, this report lays out a clear description of IoT connectivity for utility metering, including comparison of 15 different technologies and a deep look at the business model and market growth. This application will be very different from other IoT functions, and the business model reflects a rapidly evolving market.
Unlike many other IoT markets, the Smart Utility Meter market is well underway. About 48 million smart meters are currently deployed per year. In this report, Mobile Experts has compared PLC, 802.15.4 mesh, Wi-Fi, licensed narrowband (FSK), and cellular technologies in order to demonstrate the full range of this market’s potential. The Mobile Experts analysts break down why some technologies are losing ground in the smart meter area, and why other technologies will lunge ahead. The Mobile Experts analyst team is well positioned to assess the impact of new NB-IoT technology on the entrenched competition in the smart meter marketplace.
“The Smart Utility Meter market started with Automatic Meter Reading (AMR) as a way to reduce labor cost,” explained Joe Madden, Principal Analyst at Mobile Experts LLC. “More recent Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) has opened up much more value for utilities, as they can control individual service, offer differentiated pricing, and manage their services more effectively.”
“This study is the next step in the Mobile Experts IoT Series, in which we are making hard-nosed technology comparisons for very specific applications and also matching up companies with business models in each IoT market. This 50-page study is a good example of how Mobile Experts dives deeper than other analyst firms to show the fundamental limitations of technology and a comprehensive view of business factors.”
More than 65 companies are profiled in this report, illustrating the clash between very different ecosystems in this market:
- Aclara (GE)
- Alstom (GE)
- Analog Devices
- B Meters SRL
- Badger Metering
- Cypress Semiconductor
- Glen Canyon Corp.
- Holley Metering
- Iljin Electric
- Landis + Gyr (Toshiba)
- LoRa Alliance
- LS Industrial
- Maxim Integrated Products
- Mitsubishi Electric
- Mueller Systems
- Neptune Technology
- Ningbo Sanxing
- Nordic semiconductor
- Nuri Telecom
- NXP (Including former Freescale)
- ON Semiconductor
- OpenADR Alliance
- Roper Technologies / Technology
- S&T AG (Echelon)
- Schneider Electric
- Secure Meters UK Ltd.
- Silicon Labs (Including Ember)
- Silver Spring
- ST Microelectronics
- Tantalus Systems
- Texas Instruments
- Wasion Group
- ZIV (CG, Avantha Group)
For more information please visit www.mobile-experts.net.
The post Mobile Experts Release Smart Utility Meters Report appeared first on IoT – Internet of Things.
Read more here:: iot.do/feed
A white paper for the Telecommunications Industry Association from Machina Research emphatically reveals the coming importance of enterprise IoT and the central role systems integrators are playing in the commercial development and deployment of Internet of Things services. A survey of 200 businesses revealed the vast majority will be using Internet of Things services within two years and that nearly two thirds of companies are currently working with systems integrators to progress internal IoT projects.
“Overwhelmingly businesses have woken up to the transformational benefits of IoT and are rushing to deploy those services, but at the same time appreciate there may be a rocky road ahead turning a good idea into a technically feasible and profitable one,” said Jim Nolan, Executive Vice President, IoT Solutions, at InterDigital. “This is where companies like IBM, HP, Tech Mahindra, Wipro, Accenture and other system integrators are worth their weight in gold, making the link between specialized IoT providers and the applications that companies need to leverage connectivity.”
The research report, co-sponsored by InterDigital and Telit, shows that overall demand for Internet of Things applications and services remains extremely high, with the vast majority of decision makers (91%) expected to be using some form of commercial IoT service within the next two years. Indeed, almost half (48%) are benefitting from them today.
As partners, they’re turning to those they trust ahead of those most specialized, with systems integrators (28%) and business software partners like Salesforce.com and Oracle (16%) leading the responses. Even among Internet of Things companies, the focus was on end-to-end solution providers, whether standards-based (16%) or proprietary (15%), versus technology suppliers. Interestingly, mobile operators were not a partner of choice, with only 8% of respondents seeing them as primary providers.
In terms of driving adoption, cost savings held the edge over expanding business, with monitoring for maintenance (25%) and reducing operational expenses (25%) comprising half of respondents’ top strategic reasons for deployment, versus just over one third of respondents who favored expanding revenue opportunities (18%) or better competing with rival products and services (18%).
With such vast scale building around commercial IoT deployments, decision makers singled out the importance of agreeing a set of IoT standards to futureproof new services. Such an open commitment to standardization will ease the task facing systems integrators in developing and building adaptable and interoperable IoT applications.
Of the businesses participating in the research, 66% highlighted standards as being either crucial or significantly important in the adoption of the IoT services over the next couple of years. As part of the solution for solving the complexity of incorporating IoT, 76% of companies are either exclusively or primarily focusing on integrating legacy business systems with IoT solutions to get them fit for purpose.
Other key findings of the report included:
- On average, 44% of IT budgets will by 2020 be solely used for the purpose of Internet of Things project development and maintenance
- 76% of enterprises indicate they have short-term (i.e. within next two years) goals for the integration of new Internet of Things solutions with legacy systems
- 98% of decision makers consider product monitoring useful to their businesses, with 78% indicating the ability to receive real-time data from their products would be extremely beneficial
“The importance of marrying IoT with the existing legacy systems cannot be downplayed. Along with having a set of standards in place, businesses will be leaning heavily on system integrators to weave the future with the present,” said Andy Castonguay, Principal Analyst, Machina Research and lead author for this report. “Our research shows businesses are prepared to set aside nearly half of their IT budgets by 2020 to get this right, demonstrating just how much of an opportunity IoT represents.”
InterDigital develops wireless technologies for mobile devices, networks, and services. It is a key contributor to global wireless standards, designing and developing a wide range of innovations that are used in digital cellular and wireless products and networks, including Internet of Things , 2G, 3G, 4G and IEEE 802-related products and networks.
For more information, visit: www.interdigital.com.
Read more here:: iot.do/feed
By Jennifer Bly, Public Relations and Social Media Coordinator, ARIN
Many organizations have already successfully deployed IPv6. In your journey to do the same, seeking out advice from those who have already been there can help you along in the process. In a featured session at the ARIN 37 Public Policy and Members Meeting, a group of experts from a diverse range of companies (e.g. large and small ISPs, enterprise, software, CDNs, cloud services providers) discussed IPv6 obstacles and successes at their own organizations.
Questions asked of panelists included some standouts like:
- Do you advertise that you’re utilizing IPv6, or do you just try to make it so the customer never realizes that the transition has happened?
- Having gone through implementations, what kind of long-term benefits have you seen, in terms of automation and scale?
- How has your organization been with adapting tools, back office systems, sales systems, CRM, CRPs, billing systems, etc. to accommodate your IPv6 transition?
- What advice would you give based on your experience regarding what worked well and what didn’t?
- Why did you decide to not simply keep buying IPv4 addresses or embrace carrier-grade NAT?
A few highlighted quotes from the panel were:
“When you look at how many devices we would like to provision, continuing to try and buy IP[v4] addresses and propagate that model and the amount of money that it would require, it’s actually cheaper to deploy v6.” – Dan Alexander, Network Engineer, Comcast
“[IPv6 deployment] doesn’t just happen. You need to put someone in charge of it. You need to have somebody own that process” – Rob Seastrom, Principal Engineer, Time Warner Cable
“We’ve had a lot of internal activism going out to the various software development departments saying: If you’re building code that doesn’t support v6, you’re hurting the company.” – Owen DeLong, Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies
“When we went out and built our under-LAN infrastructure, v6 allocations made it a lot easier for different locations and sites and we were able to properly plan long term.” – Charles Gucker, Network Engineer, VMware
“One of the keys for success is having a good v6 addressing plan to make your deployments simple. For example, we assigned a /48 to each site and then on occasion we embed the VLAN number inside our addressing blocks so it’s easy for people to find.” – Andrew Dul, Network Architect, EGATE Networks
Those are only a few gems from the discussion. Watch the entire session below or read through the full transcript on our website.
If you have an IPv6 success story you’d like to share, we’d love to help get the word out. Drop us a note in the comments or shoot us an email at firstname.lastname@example.org and we’ll be in touch.
The post IPv6 Success Stories from Companies that Have Done It appeared first on Team ARIN.
Read more here:: teamarin.net/feed/
Digi-Key Electronics, the industry leader in electronic component selection, availability and delivery will be discussing with attendees how the company’s business model and updated designs tools can help the design engineer with their entire design process at the 2016 Embedded World conference in Nuremberg, Germany.
“We want to remind our European customers that we offer the world’s largest selection of electronic components in stock and ready for immediate shipment,” said Hermann Reiter, Director of Sales for Central & Eastern Europe. “As a 100% franchised distributor, engineers can rest easy knowing their parts are coming directly from the manufacturer and we ship it to their front doors in as little as 24 to 48 hours.”
The company offers customers and engineers numerous value-added services including a variety of low-cost and professional EDA tools; reference, article and video libraries that offer ‘how to’ videos such as Another Geek Moment and Product Training Modules (PTMs); online technical support 24/7 via digikey.com and eewiki.net; extensive BOM tool; and more.
Digi-Key’s booth is located in Hall 4A, Stand 631 and the company, as well as numerous suppliers, will have representatives present to show attendees how easily various products can be used in their own developments. Also to be discussed is how Digi-Key offers a head-start with their value-added services as well as programming examples, free source code or technical support.
Attendees are encouraged to stop by the booth to view various live demos, including:
- Thermal Imaging with FLIR Infrared Camera displayed on a Newhaven LCD display
- This demo shows how to use the FLIR Infrared Camera easily under Linux with a BeagleBone and how to display a live image
- Weather Station with TE Connectivity Sensors and BLE Connection
- See how a BLE Connection can be established and how the sensor data can be transferred
- Display Sensor Data via Panasonic BLE on a Newhaven Touch Display with a Microchip PIC24 System
- This demo visualizes the sensor data from the above weather station via the established BLE Connection and displays it on a Newhaven Touch Display
- Trinamic stepper motor controller and driver with Digi International XBEE Wi-Fi Module
- Try out different modes in how to control stepper motors and learn about the differences
- Neural Network Pattern recognition solution with Cognimem
- Take the first steps with Neural Networks and learn how easy it can be used
- Wireless Charging with an IDT Solution and display the charge via wireless connection
- Wireless charging arrives more and more within different industrial products; learn how to charge a super cap and display the charge via wireless transfer on a small LCD-Display
- IoT Sensors via GSM with Nimbelink on a BeagleBone
- Learn how to transfer sensor data via a GSM Connection to the cloud.
- Learn about key updates to Digi-Key’s Scheme-it and PCBWeb design tool offerings and get to know the company’s newest EDA tools
“The Digi-Key motto is ‘by engineers for engineers,’” added David Sandys, Director, Technical & Strategic Marketing. “We were started by an engineer and we work hard to maintain our commitment to be the best place to search, find, and buy electronic components 24/7.”
For more information about Digi-Key products, please visit www.digikey.com.
The post Digi-Key will Present Innovative Products at Embedded World 2016 appeared first on IoT – Internet of Things.
Read more here:: iot.do/feed
Zebra Technologies Corporation, a global leader in solutions and services that provide real-time visibility into organizations’ assets, people and transactions and Atmel Corporation, a leader in microcontroller (MCU) and touch technology solutions, announced it is demonstrating a smart refrigeration Internet of Things (IoT) reference design at NRF 2016 being held on Jan. 17-20, 2016, at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in New York City. In addition to the latest in low-power silicon and cloud services, this demonstration at booth #1603 will show how products designed with the ARM mbed IoT Device Platform bring improved security and energy efficiency.
Consumer demand for fresher, safer food and medication is driving retailers to invest in automatic, non-invasive temperature monitoring of refrigeration units. According to the CDC, 48 million Americans get sick each year from foodborne diseases. Compliance is increasingly necessary with the adoption of the Food Safety Modernization Act.
Zebra’s Zatar, the first ARM mbed™ enabled IoT Cloud Service, offers seamless, out-of-the-box connectivity with any device for both reference designs and commercial-scale solutions. Zebra is working together with silicon partners like Atmel to bring state-of-the-art, IoT reference designs that Fortune 1000 companies can pilot immediately and deploy in-scale to address specific industry pain points like temperature monitoring of perishable goods.
- The Smart Refrigeration IoT Solution Reference Design provides an easy-to-deploy, cloud-based temperature monitoring solution using wireless sensors, mesh networking technologies and the Zatar IoT Cloud Service.
- This solution utilizes inexpensive sensors together with Atmel | SMART 802.15.4 solutions and mesh communications with Zatar.
- The collaboration between Zatar and Atmel will allow retailers, manufacturers and logistics companies to quickly deploy automatic, commercial-class temperature monitoring in their stores and facilities from trusted vendors.
- The first ARM mbed-enabled IoT Cloud Service, Zatar is an open, industry-standard-based platform designed to manage large-scale, commercial deployments and reduce the time-to-market for connected products.
For more information,
The post Zebra Technologies Introduces Smart Refrigeration IoT Solution for Retailers appeared first on IoT – Internet of Things.
Read more here:: iot.do/feed
The Swedish alliance for IoT entrepreneurs welcomes four new members: Narrative, Ngenic, Tinitell and EWA Solutions. The latest expansion brings SMSE to 48 members and 14 partners and is a clear indication of a growing and well working IoT eco system in Sweden. “Sweden has become a hotbed for IoT across industries and our alliance fuel that development,” said […]
Read more here:: www.m2mnow.biz/feed/
Digital Lumens and Peerless Research Group (PRG) unveiled a new study, “How Tracking/Managing Energy Consumption Drives Real Cost Savings.”
The report, based on findings from 230 facility managers involved with warehouse and distribution center operations and with average facility size of 330,000 square feet, found that understanding energy consumption was a top priority for nearly all (93%) of respondents, yet fewer than a third (29%) were actually fully aware of power consumption at their site.
Key findings of the report include:
- The role of IoT presents a huge opportunity: Just one out of five managers is very familiar with the idea of IoT, and about half (48%) are implementing, planning or thinking about adopting an IoT strategy;
- Lighting is a key priority: For organizations that want to improve efficiency, 79% of respondents identified lighting as the area they would like to replace; and
- IT and facilities regularly interact: Two thirds of respondents coordinate with IT departments when employing energy-efficiency projects.
“The data shows that the materials handling industry has organizations distributed across the energy-efficiency spectrum, with high-performers already locking in savings and driving down operational costs,” said Judd Aschenbrand, Director of Research, Peerless Research Group. “Those who have not implemented programs have opportunities to lead their organizations to build new efficiency initiatives, with the potential to deploy IoT-based systems that will offer value far beyond energy efficiency.”
The findings highlight the potential to align goals, processes, and programs at the corporate level to support energy reduction goals in day-to-day operations and during the procurement process. For example, while more respondents rated total cost of ownership (TCO) and ongoing maintenance costs as being highly important when considering energy efficiency solutions, just 36% of respondents evaluate TCO on energy systems. This suggests that few organizations take the long-term view on energy efficiency technology investments, and do not align their purchasing programs or employee incentive programs to reward long-term thinking.
“The responses provide numerous insights into areas where organizations can leverage intelligent systems, and educate facility managers and other decision-makers on the applications and benefits of an IoT strategy,” said Tom Pincince, CEO and President, Digital Lumens. “The results also suggest that while some companies have an understanding of energy consumption, the lack of granularity of this knowledge presents opportunities for improvements.”
To view the study’s complete findings or learn more about its methodology, download the full report, How Tracking/Managing Energy Consumption Drives Real Cost Savings.
About Digital Lumens
Digital Lumens is the market leader in enterprise-scale intelligent LED lighting systems for global enterprises, delivering up to 90% energy savings and a platform for building intelligence. With deployments of 200 million square feet (20 million square meters) across more than 45 countries, Digital Lumens brings the tangible benefits of Internet of Things (IoT) to commercial and industrial lighting environments.
About Peerless Media
Peerless Research Group is the research division of Peerless Media, LLC.Founded in 2010, Peerless Media is the leading provider of independent business content and information serving the supply chain, logistics, materials handling and design engineering industries. Through our flagship brands (Logistics Management, Modern Materials Handling, Supply Chain Management Review, Material Handling Product News, Supply Chain 24/7, and Desktop Engineering), we offer unparalleled B2B coverage via publications, Websites, newsletters, conferences, and research.
Read more here:: iot.do/feed
By Milan Goldas
ThroughTek, leading Internet of Things (IoT) & market-leading Machine-to-Machine (M2M) solutions provider, today announced findings from its “IoT Makers’ Battle Report” that highlights consumers’ brand and device preferences across IoT. The report found nearly half of consumers aware of IoT devices on the market are most familiar with Apple’s IoT devices (48%), while surprisingly only […]
The post Apple ranked ‘Most Recognisable IoT Brand’ with Google least lecognised among consumers, says ThroughTek appeared first on M2M Now – News and expert opinions on the M2M industry, machine to machine magazine.
Read more here:: www.m2mnow.biz/feed/
Network Working Group J. Reynolds, Editor Request for Comments: 3232 RFC Editor Obsoletes: 1700 January 2002 Category: Informational
Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced by an On-line Database
Status of this Memo This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. Abstract This memo obsoletes RFC 1700 (STD 2) "Assigned Numbers", which contained an October 1994 snapshot of assigned Internet protocol parameters. Description From November 1977 through October 1994, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) periodically published tables of the Internet protocol parameter assignments in RFCs entitled, "Assigned Numbers". The most current of these Assigned Numbers RFCs had Standard status and carried the designation: STD 2. At this time, the latest STD 2 is RFC 1700. Since 1994, this sequence of RFCs have been replaced by an online database accessible through a web page (currently, www.iana.org). The purpose of the present RFC is to note this fact and to officially obsolete RFC 1700, whose status changes to Historic. RFC 1700 is obsolete, and its values are incomplete and in some cases may be wrong. We expect this series to be revived in the future by the new IANA organization. Security Considerations This memo does not affect the technical security of the Internet. Reynolds Informational [Page 1]
Network Working Group M. Crawford
Request for Comments: 2464 Fermilab
Obsoletes: 1972 December 1998
Category: Standards Track
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
This document specifies the frame format for transmission of IPv6
packets and the method of forming IPv6 link-local addresses and
statelessly autoconfigured addresses on Ethernet networks. It also
specifies the content of the Source/Target Link-layer Address option
used in Router Solicitation, Router Advertisement, Neighbor
Solicitation, Neighbor Advertisement and Redirect messages when those
messages are transmitted on an Ethernet.
This document replaces RFC 1972, "A Method for the Transmission of
IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks", which will become historic.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119].
2. Maximum Transmission Unit
The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPV6] packets on an Ethernet is 1500
octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement [DISC]
containing an MTU option which specifies a smaller MTU, or by manual
configuration of each node. If a Router Advertisement received on an
Ethernet interface has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger than
1500, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU option may
be logged to system management but must be otherwise ignored.
For purposes of this document, information received from DHCP is
considered "manually configured" and the term Ethernet includes
CSMA/CD and full-duplex subnetworks based on ISO/IEC 8802-3, with
various data rates.
3. Frame Format
IPv6 packets are transmitted in standard Ethernet frames. The
Ethernet header contains the Destination and Source Ethernet
addresses and the Ethernet type code, which must contain the value
86DD hexadecimal. The data field contains the IPv6 header followed
immediately by the payload, and possibly padding octets to meet the
minimum frame size for the Ethernet link.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
| Destination |
| Ethernet |
| Address |
| Source |
| Ethernet |
| Address |
|1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1|
| IPv6 |
| header |
| and |
/ payload ... /
(Each tic mark represents one bit.)
4. Stateless Autoconfiguration
The Interface Identifier [AARCH] for an Ethernet interface is based
on the EUI-64 identifier [EUI64] derived from the interface's built-
in 48-bit IEEE 802 address. The EUI-64 is formed as follows.
(Canonical bit order is assumed throughout.)
The OUI of the Ethernet address (the first three octets) becomes the
company_id of the EUI-64 (the first three octets). The fourth and
fifth octets of the EUI are set to the fixed value FFFE hexadecimal.
The last three octets of the Ethernet address become the last three
octets of the EUI-64.
The Interface Identifier is then formed from the EUI-64 by
complementing the "Universal/Local" (U/L) bit, which is the next-to-
lowest order bit of the first octet of the EUI-64. Complementing
this bit will generally change a 0 value to a 1, since an interface's
built-in address is expected to be from a universally administered
address space and hence have a globally unique value. A universally
administered IEEE 802 address or an EUI-64 is signified by a 0 in the
U/L bit position, while a globally unique IPv6 Interface Identifier
is signified by a 1 in the corresponding position. For further
discussion on this point, see [AARCH].
For example, the Interface Identifier for an Ethernet interface whose
built-in address is, in hexadecimal,
A different MAC address set manually or by software should not be
used to derive the Interface Identifier. If such a MAC address must
be used, its global uniqueness property should be reflected in the
value of the U/L bit.
An IPv6 address prefix used for stateless autoconfiguration [ACONF]
of an Ethernet interface must have a length of 64 bits.
5. Link-Local Addresses
The IPv6 link-local address [AARCH] for an Ethernet interface is
formed by appending the Interface Identifier, as defined above, to
the prefix FE80::/64.
10 bits 54 bits 64 bits
|1111111010| (zeros) | Interface Identifier |
6. Address Mapping -- Unicast
The procedure for mapping IPv6 unicast addresses into Ethernet link-
layer addresses is described in [DISC]. The Source/Target Link-layer
Address option has the following form when the link layer is
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
| Type | Length |
+- Ethernet -+
+- Address -+
Type 1 for Source Link-layer address.
2 for Target Link-layer address.
Length 1 (in units of 8 octets).
The 48 bit Ethernet IEEE 802 address, in canonical bit
order. This is the address the interface currently
responds to, and may be different from the built-in
address used to derive the Interface Identifier.
7. Address Mapping -- Multicast
An IPv6 packet with a multicast destination address DST, consisting
of the sixteen octets DST through DST, is transmitted to the
Ethernet multicast address whose first two octets are the value 3333
hexadecimal and whose last four octets are the last four octets of
|0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1|0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1|
| DST | DST |
| DST | DST |
8. Differences From RFC 1972
The following are the functional differences between this
specification and RFC 1972.
The Address Token, which was a node's 48-bit MAC address, is
replaced with the Interface Identifier, which is 64 bits in
length and based on the EUI-64 format [EUI64]. An IEEE-defined
mapping exists from 48-bit MAC addresses to EUI-64 form.
A prefix used for stateless autoconfiguration must now be 64 bits
long rather than 80. The link-local prefix is also shortened to
9. Security Considerations
The method of derivation of Interface Identifiers from MAC addresses
is intended to preserve global uniqueness when possible. However,
there is no protection from duplication through accident or forgery.
[AARCH] Hinden, R. and S. Deering "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.
[ACONF] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998.
[DISC] Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W. Simpson, "Neighbor Discovery
for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December 1998.
[EUI64] "Guidelines For 64-bit Global Identifier (EUI-64)",
[IPV6] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC 2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
11. Author's Address
Fermilab MS 368
PO Box 500
Batavia, IL 60510
Phone: +1 630 840-3461
12. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.