IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [coman] New terminology section for LWIG and COMAN

"Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com> Fri, 10 August 2012 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
X-Original-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: coman@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC7521F8620; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 06:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.578
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.578 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.021, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 qktXYO8Gurfg; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 06:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (demumfd002.nsn-inter.net [93.183.12.31]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C576121F861F; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 06:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.129.55]) by demumfd002.nsn-inter.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q7ADOZua031441 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:24:35 +0200
Received: from DEMUEXC048.nsn-intra.net ([10.159.32.94]) by demuprx016.emea.nsn-intra.net (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id q7ADOXao008301; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:24:34 +0200
Received: from DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net ([10.150.128.18]) by DEMUEXC048.nsn-intra.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:24:31 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 15:24:30 +0200
Message-ID: <80A0822C5E9A4440A5117C2F4CD36A64041CD7C7@DEMUEXC006.nsn-intra.net>
In-Reply-To: <ECFCA1CB-8969-4A6E-B3FC-BE6B73F9D86C@tzi.org>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [coman] New terminology section for LWIG and COMAN
Thread-Index: Ac12+OcAETFQH+LlS0Cl+AND/L8LuQAAUBmQ
References: <462C27CF-98BB-4C77-AE8F-8C0669B3FE9F@tzi.org><20120810105625.GB3122@elstar.local> <ECFCA1CB-8969-4A6E-B3FC-BE6B73F9D86C@tzi.org>
From: "Ersue, Mehmet (NSN - DE/Munich)" <mehmet.ersue@nsn.com>
To: ext Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Aug 2012 13:24:31.0588 (UTC) FILETIME=[79CBCA40:01CD76FB]
X-purgate-type: clean
X-purgate-Ad: Categorized by eleven eXpurgate (R) http://www.eleven.de
X-purgate: clean
X-purgate: This mail is considered clean (visit http://www.eleven.de for further information)
X-purgate-size: 1821
X-purgate-ID: 151667::1344605077-00003184-C0AC0E13/0-0/0-0
Cc: coman@ietf.org, lwip@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [coman] New terminology section for LWIG and COMAN
X-BeenThere: coman@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 13:24:40 -0000

Hi Carsten,

the terminology section is very useful. It makes also sense if our document refers to draft-ietf-lwig-guidance concerning the terminology and network management sections but also for the technologies described.

Are you actually planning to describe the self-configuration of hosts in section 5.4., which I assume is an essential issue for constrained nodes.
I think the authors of draft-nieminen-core-service-discovery could help here.

Cheers, 
Mehmet 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: coman-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:coman-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of ext
> Carsten Bormann
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 3:06 PM
> To: Juergen Schoenwaelder
> Cc: coman@ietf.org; lwip@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [coman] New terminology section for LWIG and COMAN
> 
> On Aug 10, 2012, at 12:56, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-
> university.de> wrote:
> 
> > This is useful, thanks for writing it down.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > I am not sure what the term "challenged network" really buys us. I did
> > not see the term "challenged network" actually used in RFC4838, but I
> > do understand that the DTN community used this term. My preference
> > would be to move the three bullets currently in 2.2.1 up to section
> > 2.2. and to collapse 2.2.1 into a note that simply explains that the
> > term "challenged network" has been used for a certain subset of
> > constrained networks as part of the DTN work.
> 
> I was mostly trying to declare the really challenged networks out of scope and delegate
> to RFC 4838.
> Apparently I'll need to clarify this.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 
> _______________________________________________
> coman mailing list
> coman@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/coman

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email