IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6lowapp] [6lowpan] hardware trends, new vs. existing protocols [Re: 4861 usage in LLNs]

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 11 November 2009 08:46 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: 6lowapp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowapp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C753D3A6A01 for <6lowapp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:46:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0P5mOWO-B2-G for <6lowapp@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:46:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from informatik.uni-bremen.de (mailhost.informatik.uni-bremen.de [IPv6:2001:638:708:30c9:209:3dff:fe00:7136]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39EB3A6A85 for <6lowapp@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 00:46:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at informatik.uni-bremen.de
Received: from smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de [134.102.224.120]) by informatik.uni-bremen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id nAB8lGrF007945; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:47:16 +0100 (CET)
Received: from host-24-126.meeting.ietf.org (host-24-126.meeting.ietf.org [133.93.24.126]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-fb3.informatik.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB61EBE25; Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:47:14 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1076)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <D99B96F0-1AE1-4D65-910A-F0A8262D95F4@inf.ethz.ch>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:47:10 +0900
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <C2927D78-6AEF-4D89-8F6C-07007EE924E4@tzi.org>
References: <87y6mfwbfk.fsf@kelsey-ws.hq.ember.com> <1257809361.11184.123.camel@dellx1> <BCFFD6A3-8B4F-49CF-A657-DE34485134E1@tzi.org> <4AF8C20C.3070905@eecs.berkeley.edu> <9256B623-E13C-4EB3-9DE9-F850F2E828AC@tzi.org> <6B8DDEBE-5550-4795-81E0-DC137114EF83@archrock.com> <4AF8D5A0.1020600@eecs.berkeley.edu> <05C6A38D732F1144A8C4016BA4416BFE0242D3B1@SPO-EXVS-02.itron.com> <4AF90433.30204@eecs.berkeley.edu> <87639il2fh.fsf@kelsey-ws.hq.ember.com> <4AF9BB54.7070006@eecs.berkeley.edu> <4AFA0462.2090807@gridmerge.com> <D99B96F0-1AE1-4D65-910A-F0A8262D95F4@inf.ethz.ch>
To: Vlad Trifa <trifa@inf.ethz.ch>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1076)
Cc: 6lowapp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [6lowapp] [6lowpan] hardware trends, new vs. existing protocols [Re: 4861 usage in LLNs]
X-BeenThere: 6lowapp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Application protocols for constrained nodes and networks <6lowapp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp>, <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowapp>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowapp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp>, <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:46:56 -0000

[limiting reply set to 6lowapp trying to untangle this thread]

On Nov 11, 2009, at 17:19, Vlad Trifa wrote:

> bandwidth is a not-so-critical constraint

I don't think you can describe the difficulties of constrained nodes/ 
networks using a single metric.
Indeed, the peak bitrate of a wireless technology may not be so bad,  
but challenges remain that may make existing protocols hard to use.   
Or maybe they don't -- that's why we are not at all trying to funnel  
all communication from the constrained network through CoAP (or  
CoGIIs).  This *is* IP, after all.

Gruesse, Carsten

v2.34.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status