IETF Logo Mail Archive

[coman] Device Classes?

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Wed, 02 April 2014 07:46 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26A261A00CF for <coman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 00:46:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RETctgB4TtXP for <coman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 00:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 165871A00C9 for <coman@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Apr 2014 00:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.131.137] ([80.92.119.215]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MJFBe-1WSW3V29f8-002lzq for <coman@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 Apr 2014 09:46:27 +0200
Message-ID: <533BBFB7.2000100@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 09:43:51 +0200
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "coman@ietf.org" <coman@ietf.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ACnF36Oi7btDdXK0IP1borrNkkTgAvp0n"
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:AS+5c5An0jnxHVXJbVMRLaHu6IrisBLr1wsyALguKKjFLSUFJn2 31V9L+w7VGaJblAAieYErkU8V4NWzycs9XSf6V89eqarIQLYEXaq9J+8qtYuvjvyznFzhSd SSc2510VmokkCARuNkknEpZu0hfTLuQ8/HLD50fIJbpVUmJVVNXKKCE0p+beE3C5K4Y9Mjt /hlcFsi9E7HHRrZPN8WRA==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/coman/FyMxJbt_yZEAnaDY4BsWth8Ud6o
Subject: [coman] Device Classes?
X-BeenThere: coman@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Management of Constrained Networks and Devices <coman.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/coman>, <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/coman/>
List-Post: <mailto:coman@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/coman>, <mailto:coman-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 07:46:37 -0000

A question out of curiosity:

The LWIG terminology document defines classes of devices and makes
statements about what can and cannot be done for each class.

IMHO these classes are about end devices rather than constrained routers
and switches. Guys in the network management environment seem to care a
lot about the management of network nodes.

What are the expectations about RAM, flash size, CPU requirements, etc.
for these constrained routers/switches?

Ciao
Hannes

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email