IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions

Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu> Fri, 12 July 2013 16:42 UTC

Return-Path: <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
X-Original-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32BF21F9F75 for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:42:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Q+wrmlP+Sr0b for <6tsch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:42:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com (mail-ie0-f181.google.com [209.85.223.181]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CC3921F9F77 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:42:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f181.google.com with SMTP id x12so21287906ief.12 for <6tsch@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=ZVVCduuF9Bk4OwEoXDpxoQlnbRYCP8I6MiCSVvbaBK4=; b=nnfeF1b0q7QLMHQyXrwfH5yKI8MiYUs9e8AqjQb2iwZitIahfJU9N746Ezu98gjfTN CotDabkX6Lgvmohy+H5CIwMIOqvpW/G5uMdtaF6bOMkn3ApqGlQtMQBOCZbZwIy3AiZL YqWp7SboO/COrBrvq5UJfUx0MhzU801rgcv7VsVDi0+a4JsZxUaUVptjF+xANs+KxLgi PgBdXzroZHAZnLWhcO/DDWKkvZ3JipqVa2x1dZVzitcDRaDdlDosSKaj5WXw9gOyvcgh NG2D6ZcIBDBgX/Ux1EeCOMBi8oRhmQTLjlngYqJMEQCVWHVlXnsE4gO2uq5ziS3IyqC+ R5PA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.43.157.200 with SMTP id lr8mr13105969icc.104.1373647333205; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.54.233 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD84136FC01@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
References: <CADJ9OA8YUqyFSefpgxd7iurL-mk3sm0EEkNfmaZVkcP+jRUBNg@mail.gmail.com> <E045AECD98228444A58C61C200AE1BD84136FC01@xmb-rcd-x01.cisco.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 00:42:11 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAzoce7VSFFh=mA+fy+OaLE8Zd1c=HaaGEHdZ-XAWQONOWOnBg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Qin Wang <qinwang@berkeley.edu>
To: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2154857b6df04e153312a"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkZYikI2nl5V5IHKrgG0Ut0uSfsfZY50sEWNJJrrPt42q72MORE0kz32RSVdpvovr4o5pTT
Cc: Thomas Watteyne <watteyne@eecs.berkeley.edu>, 6TSCH <6tsch@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6tsch] terminology draft: quick questions
X-BeenThere: 6tsch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discuss link layer model for Deterministic IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e, and impacts on RPL and 6LoWPAN such as resource allocation" <6tsch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6tsch>
List-Post: <mailto:6tsch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tsch>, <mailto:6tsch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 16:42:27 -0000

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
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email