Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions

Agree!

Qin

On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 12:47 AM, Pascal Thubert
<pascal.thubert@gmail.com>wrote:

> Well we still need to indicate that the link scope is one radio hop, that
> much is non obvious. And I think it is better to have the entry if only to
> avoid any confusion and insist that we use the IETF term, what do you think?
>
> Pascal
>
> Le 12 juil. 2013 à 18:42, Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> a écrit :
>
> Hi Pascal,
>
> Do you mean we use same definition of Link as IP link? If yes, maybe we
> can remove the term of "Link" from this draft. How do you think?
>
> Thanks
> Qin
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 11:04 PM, Pascal Thubert (pthubert) <
> pthubert@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>>  Hi Thomas:****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> As an IETF document we can expect that the reader will understand the
>> link as an IP link as opposed to a 802.15.4e one.****
>>
>> Maybe our terminology should refer to existing RFCs and say that we have
>> the same concept. We need to insist that these are one hop things for L3
>> operations…****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> RFC 4862****
>>
>>
>>
>> ****
>>
>>    link -  a communication facility or medium over which nodes can****
>>
>>      communicate at the link layer, i.e., the layer immediately below****
>>
>>       IP.  Examples are Ethernets (simple or bridged); PPP links; X.25,**
>> **
>>
>>       Frame Relay, or ATM networks; and Internet (or higher) layer****
>>
>>       "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or IPv6 itself.  The protocol*
>> ***
>>
>>       described in this document will be used on all types of links****
>>
>>       unless specified otherwise in the link-type-specific document****
>>
>>       describing how to operate IP on the link in line with [RFC4861]. **
>> **
>>
>>    interface -  a node's attachment to a link.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-autoconf-manetarch-07****
>>
>>  ** **
>>
>>    Link****
>>
>>       a communication facility or medium over which nodes can****
>>
>>       communicate at the link layer, i.e., the layer immediately below****
>>
>>       IP.  Examples are Ethernets (simple or bridged), PPP links, X.25,****
>>
>>       Frame Relay, or ATM networks as well as internet (or higher) layer****
>>
>>       "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or IPv6 itself.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Cheers,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Pascal****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* 6tsch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:6tsch-bounces@ietf.org] *On
>> Behalf Of *Thomas Watteyne
>> *Sent:* vendredi 12 juillet 2013 15:40
>>
>> *To:* 6TSCH
>> *Subject:* [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Maria Rita,****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> I'm going over the (draft) terminology draft at
>> https://bitbucket.org/6tsch/draft-palattella-6tsch-terminology/<https://bitbucket.org/6tsch/draft-palattella-6tsch-terminology/wiki/Home> ,
>> and see that the term "link" is defined as****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> "Single-hop connection between two or more devices. It can be dedicated
>> (point-to-point), multi-point, broadcast."****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Quick questions:****
>>
>> - do we want to use the term link at all. This raised some conflicts with
>> IETF and IEEE802.15.4e terminology, and we went for "bundle" and "cell".
>> Maybe this "link" refers to a different element?****
>>
>> - in the current definition, what do p-to-p and multi-point mean?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Thanks,****
>>
>> Thomas****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 6tsch mailing list
>> 6tsch@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 6tsch mailing list
> 6tsch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch
>
>